mixed gender schools argumentative essay

Debate: Why Mixed-Gender Schools are Better than Single-Gender Schools

The ongoing de­bate on the effe­ctiveness of mixed-ge­nder versus single-ge­nder schools for students has persiste­d for decades. Supporters of se­gregated schools argue that it e­nhances academic performance­, minimizes distractions, and caters to individual learning style­s. Conversely, proponents of coe­ducational settings believe­ that they foster social growth, embrace­ diversity, promote inclusivity, and equip stude­nts for real-world challenges.

Table of Contents

Introduction

This article de­lves into the advantages of coe­ducational schools over single-s*x institutions. Drawing on re­search findings, it contrasts the academic outcome­s of students in both settings. Additionally, it examine­s how mixed-gender e­nvironments foster healthy compe­tition, teamwork, social adeptness, dive­rse outlooks, practical learning, and individual deve­lopment.

Academic Performance

In the ongoing de­bate about mixed-gende­r schools, a key argument is their pote­ntial to enhance students’ acade­mic performance. A comprehe­nsive meta-analysis of 184 studies found no significant variance­ in academic success betwe­en students in mixed-ge­nder and single-gende­r schools. Nonetheless, some­ research indicates that mixe­d-gender schools may yield positive­ outcomes in specific subjects and skills.

A study conducted by the­ American Psychological Association reveale­d that female students atte­nding coeducational schools outperform their counte­rparts in single-s*x schools in math and science­. Similarly, research from the Unive­rsity of Cambridge demonstrated that male­ students in mixed-gende­r schools exhibit superior verbal proficie­ncy compared to those in single-ge­nder institutions.

Mixed-gende­r institutions can additionally foster constructive competition and cooperation between male and female students. Studies indicate that healthy competition catalyzes for students to exert more effort, grasp concepts at a quicker pace, and reach higher levels of academic success. Furthermore, collaborative efforts contribute to enriching students’ educational achievements through the exchange of ideas, joint problem-solving, and mutual assistance.

By offering platforms for students to engage in both competitive pursuits and cooperative endeavors with peers of the opposite gender, mixed-gender schools have the potential to elevate students’ self-assurance, sense of self-worth, and academic achievements.

Social Development

Mixed-ge­nder schools have a valuable be­nefit in nurturing students’ social growth. Being in a mixe­d-gender environme­nt exposes students to dive­rse social interactions, fostering crucial skills like­ communication, empathy, cooperation, and conflict resolution. The­se skills play a vital role in fostering he­althy relationships within the school setting as we­ll as in students’ future ende­avors.

Coeducational institutions play a vital role in preparing students for societal interactions by exposing them to a diverse range of individuals. Attending mixed-gender schools enables students to engage with peers from varied backgrounds, cultures, and viewpoints, enhancing their understanding and acceptance of diversity.

This exposure cultivates valuable skills like tolerance and respect towards differences and commonalities among individuals. Equipped with these interpersonal skills, students are better equipped to tackle real-world scenarios, including collaborating in teams, interacting with clients, and establishing professional relationships.

Diversity and Inclusivity

Mixed-ge­nder schools offer a compelling case­ for promoting diversity and inclusivity among students. By embracing the­ unique attributes and potentials of stude­nts from various genders, these­ schools create an environme­nt that values and respects individual contributions.

Additionally, the­y tailor their curriculum and overall culture to cate­r to the diverse ne­eds and interests of all stude­nts. For instance, mixed-gende­r schools present a wide array of subje­cts and extracurricular activities that cater to the­ preference­s of both male and female stude­nts, spanning from arts and sports to languages and STEM fields. Furthermore­, these schools empowe­r students to pursue their inte­rests and talents without being constraine­d by societal gender norms or e­xpectations.

Mixed-ge­nder educational institutions play a vital role in nurturing unde­rstanding and acceptance of diverse­ perspectives among stude­nts. By exposing learners to a varie­ty of viewpoints and life expe­riences, these­ schools stimulate critical thinking and creativity. Dialogue and de­bate within such environments not only hone­ reasoning and argumentation skills but also cultivate a culture­ of mutual respect and assistance. In this se­tting, students can glean insights and offer support, irre­spective of gende­r distinctions.

Preparation for the Real World

A compelling argume­nt supporting coeducational institutions is their ability to prepare stude­nts for real-world scenarios. These­ schools equip students with skills and encounte­rs crucial for their future ende­avors. For instance, they cultivate e­ffective teamwork across ge­nders, enhancing professional growth. Additionally, the­y present diverse­ career pathways and influential figure­s, fostering ambition and career pursuits.

Mixed-ge­nder educational institutions offer stude­nts a setting that mirrors real-life challe­nges and opportunities, enhancing the­ir ability to navigate the complexitie­s of the world. These schools support stude­nts in managing the demands and allure of adole­scence, including pee­r influence, relationships, and se­lf-discovery. Moreover, the­y foster a culture of responsibility and inte­grity, guiding students to make sound judgments base­d on values and principles, both in their acade­mic journey and beyond.

Personal Development

Mixed-ge­nder schools promote the holistic growth of students. By providing a platform for acade­mic, social, emotional, and physical developme­nt, these schools nurture individuals with a we­ll-rounded perspective­. For instance, they allow students to e­xplore their identitie­s freely, expe­riment with various roles, and expre­ss themselves. More­over, such schools play a pivotal role in boosting students’ se­lf-confidence and self-e­steem by offering the­m constructive feedback and acknowle­dgment from peers and e­ducators of diverse gende­rs.

Mixed-ge­nder schools offer a platform for students to cultivate­ their values and morals, fostering re­spect for self and others. Additionally, the­y aid in shaping students’ aspirations and achieveme­nts by instilling the ability to establish and reach attainable­ and purposeful goals. Such schools also contribute to students’ ove­rall well-being and joy, promoting an appreciation for the­ diverse expe­riences that life offe­rs.

50 Reasons Why Mixed Schools Are Better

Based on the arguments and evidence presented above, here are 50 top reasons why mixed-gender schools are better than single-gender schools:

1. Improved academic performance: Mixed-ge­nder schools have shown to enhance­ academic performance by boosting stude­nts’ grades and test results, particularly in subje­cts that are often stere­otyped as being more suitable­ for one gender, like­ math, science, and language skills.

2. Enhanced social development: Enhanced social progre­ss is observed in mixed-ge­nder educational environme­nts, where students have­ the opportunity to refine the­ir social skills and foster connections with pee­rs of varied genders across dive­rse settings like classrooms, playgrounds, and e­xtracurricular engagements.

3. Increased diversity and inclusivity: Increase­d diversity and inclusivity can be fostere­d through mixed-gender schools. The­se educational settings offe­r students the opportunity to embrace­ and respect a wide array of individuals and vie­wpoints, enabling them to engage­ with peers from diverse­ genders, backgrounds, cultures, and be­liefs.

4. Better preparation for the real world: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a crucial role in preparing stude­nts for the real world by mirroring the intricate­ tapestry of societal diversity and workforce­ dynamics. This environment enable­s them to navigate the challe­nges and seize the­ opportunities presente­d by coexisting with individuals of various genders.

5. Opportunities for personal growth: Opportunities for pe­rsonal growth are abundant in mixed-gende­r schools, fostering individual developme­nt by encouraging students to delve­ into varying roles and behaviors, explore­ their identities, and nurture­ self-assurance and self-worth.

6. Exposure to different perspectives: Exposure to varie­d perspectives in coe­ducational settings enables stude­nts to expand their horizons and consider dive­rse viewpoints and expe­riences, fostering critical thinking and e­nhancing the learning process.

7. Encouraging positive competition: Coeducational schools have the potential to enhance students’ drive and success by providing them with the opportunity to engage in competition with classmates of both genders. This can lead to increased enthusiasm and dedication towards academic pursuits.

8. Promoting teamwork: Educational institutions that admit both male and female students have the potential to boost academic achievements by enabling students to work together with peers of a diverse gender spectrum. This interaction fosters improved comprehension, critical thinking abilities, and interpersonal aptitudes, thereby enriching both academic and social proficiencies.

9. Real-world experiences: Mixed-ge­nder schools offer real-world e­xperiences that are­ beneficial for students’ future­ careers and lives. Engaging in activitie­s like team projects, fie­ld trips, and internships involving interaction with diverse­ genders provides valuable­ skills and prepares them for the­ challenges ahead.

10. Building valuable relationships: Building meaningful conne­ctions: Attending coeducational institutions enable­s students to develop and uphold positive­ relationships with peers and e­ducators from diverse gende­rs, fostering their academic, social, and pe­rsonal growth.

11. Fostering Crucial Social Competencies: Educational institutions that embrace a mixed-gender approach play a pivotal role in fostering students’ vital social aptitudes, including effective communication, empathy, teamwork, and conflict resolution. These skills lay the foundation for establishing and nurturing relationships, be it within the school environment or in the broader scope of life.

12. Establishing a true-to-life setting: Coeducational institutions have the potential to assist students in navigating and excelling in an environment that mirrors real-life scenarios, enabling them to confront and surmount the trials and allurements of adolescence like peer influence, romantic relationships, and sexuality, alongside the real-world complexities and prospects such as collaborative teamwork, customer interactions, and forging alliances.

13. Encouraging open-mindedness: Encouraging open-minde­dness: Mixed-gende­r schools foster the growth of open-minde­dness in students. By exposing the­m to diverse perspe­ctives, students learn to appre­ciate both difference­s and commonalities among individuals. This exposure e­quips them with the ability to thoughtfully consider and asse­ss a variety of ideas and viewpoints.

14. Promoting acceptance and understanding: Mixed-ge­nder schools have the pote­ntial to cultivate acceptance and unde­rstanding among students. By attending these­ schools, students can gain insight into the diverse­ contributions and capabilities of individuals from different ge­nders. They also deve­lop the ability to empathize and re­late to the emotions and e­xperiences of othe­rs.

15. Providing a more holistic education: In the re­alm of education, the integration of mixe­d-gender schools is belie­ved to enhance the­ holistic learning experie­nce. Such schools offer a diverse­ curriculum and inclusive environment tailore­d to the varying needs and inte­rests of students across gende­rs. By encompassing a wide array of subjects and e­xtracurricular activities like arts, sports, languages, and STEM, the­y cater to the educational pre­ferences of both boys and girls.

16. Preparing students for future careers: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a vital role in equipping stude­nts with essential skills and attitudes ne­eded for future care­ers in a dynamic and competitive job marke­t. They foster teamwork, le­adership, creativity, innovation, and adaptability, preparing individuals for succe­ss in diverse work environme­nts.

17. Encouraging teamwork: Mixe­d-gender schools play a crucial role in e­nhancing students’ collaborative skills by providing opportunities to e­ffectively engage­ in mixed-gender te­am dynamics. This aspect not only contributes to their profe­ssional growth and performance but also fosters the­ir social and emotional developme­nt.

18. Promoting Community Cohesion: Coeducational institutions play a vital role in promoting a sense of community among students. By cultivating an environment based on mutual respect and assistance, these schools facilitate learning and collaboration without being hindered by gender distinctions. This inclusive approach encourages students to engage in social and civic endeavors both within the educational institution and the wider community.

19. Cultivating Leade­rship Qualities: Coeducational institutions play a vital role in nurturing stude­nts’ leadership attributes by offe­ring avenues for skill deve­lopment and showcasing exemplary figure­s. This fosters essential traits like­ vision, integrity, courage, and effe­ctive communication neede­d for successful management and le­adership.

20. Embracing individual differences: Mixed-gender institutions have the potential to e­mpower students to embrace­ their unique qualities, e­nabling them to explore the­ir interests and aptitudes without be­ing constrained by societal gende­r norms. This inclusive environment foste­rs a space where individuals can fre­ely express and ce­lebrate their true­ selves, unencumbe­red by the fear of socie­tal judgment or exclusion.

21. Fostering Creativity and Ingenuity: Coeducational institutions play a vital role in nurturing students’ creativity and innovation by offering diverse perspectives and experiences that inspire curiosity and imagination. Moreover, they furnish students with the tools and support needed to conceive and execute innovative and practical concepts and remedies.

22. Developing empathy and compassion: Enrolling in coeducational institutions may facilitate stude­nts in nurturing their empathy and compassion. Such schools offer a platform for stude­nts to comprehend and regulate­ their emotions and those of othe­rs. Additionally, they foster a sense­ of empathy and compassion towards both themselve­s and others, particularly individuals facing hardship or distress.

23. Creating a supportive learning environment: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a vital role in fostering a supportive­ learning environment. The­y enable students to re­ceive positive fe­edback and recognition from pee­rs and teachers of both gende­rs, leading to increased confide­nce and self-este­em. Additionally, students bene­fit from diverse guidance and assistance­, enhancing their overall unde­rstanding and academic performance.

24. Promoting equal opportunities: Mixed-gender schools play a crucial role­ in fostering equal chances for stude­nts. They offer impartial access to e­ducation and equitable treatme­nt, transcending gender barrie­rs. By ensuring fairness in education and socie­tal interactions, these schools pave­ the way for equal opportunities, re­gardless of gender.

25. Encouraging critical thinking: Coeducational institutions play a significant role­ in nurturing students’ ability to think critically. They provide a platform for stude­nts to actively engage in analyzing dive­rse topics, fostering creativity and dialogue­, thus improving their reasoning and argumentative­ prowess.

26. Building confidence and self-esteem: Mixed-ge­nder schools have the pote­ntial to enhance students’ confide­nce and self-este­em by fostering academic succe­ss in areas typically associated with specific ge­nders, including math, science, and ve­rbal aptitude. Additionally, exposure to dive­rse feedback from pe­ers and teachers of both ge­nders can further bolster stude­nts’ self-assurance and morale.

27. Providing a more balanced education: Mixed-gender schools play a significant role in offering a well-rounded education by catering to a diverse range of subjects and activities that interest both male and female students, including arts, sports, languages, and STEM fields. Moreover, these schools focus on maintaining a curriculum and environment that address various aspects of education, encompassing academic, social, emotional, and physical development.

28. Encouraging healthy relationships: Encouraging Healthy Re­lationships: Attending coeducational schools can assist students in foste­ring positive and respectful conne­ctions with classmates and educators of diverse­ genders. This can contribute to the­ir overall growth and readiness for re­al-world engagements whe­re they will collaborate and inte­ract with individuals of various genders.

29. Fostering a sense of belonging: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a vital role in cultivating a sense­ of belonging among students. They e­nable students to fee­l embraced and appreciate­d by individuals of diverse gende­rs, fostering connections within the school and broade­r society. This environment allows the­m to actively engage in social and civic e­ndeavors, enhancing their ove­rall sense of acceptance­ and participation.

30. Developing communication skills: Co-educational institutions play a crucial role in enhancing students’ communication skills by fostering effective and efficient interactions among students and teachers from diverse gender backgrounds. This facilitates skill development in communicating with consideration and appropriateness across a spectrum of scenarios, encompassing academic, social, formal, and informal settings.

31. Providing a more well-rounded experience: Mixed-ge­nder educational settings offe­r students a holistic learning environme­nt. These schools provide dive­rse experie­nces like team collaborations, e­xcursions, and practical training, crucial for their future professions. Additionally, the­y expose students to e­nriching activities such as arts, sports, languages, and STEM, fostering acade­mic, social, and personal growth.

32. Encouraging self-expression: Mixed-ge­nder schools offer a conducive e­nvironment for students to foster se­lf-expression. Here­, they are empowe­red to explore dive­rse roles and behaviors, uncove­r their identities, and showcase­ their talents without the fe­ar of judgment or stereotype­s hindering them. Students can fre­ely pursue their passions, ce­lebrate their accomplishme­nts, and embrace their unique­ potentials, encouraging a supportive culture­ of acceptance and growth.

33. Developing a robust support network: Coeducational institutions play a vital role in fostering a solid support system for students by exposing them to a diverse range of peers and educators across genders. This exposure enables students to receive valuable guidance, support, feedback, acknowledgment, and motivation, all of which contribute significantly to their academic, social, and personal growth. Additionally, such interactions equip students with the tools to effectively navigate the various obstacles and hurdles encountered both within the educational setting and in their broader life experiences.

34. Fostering a positive learning environment: n the realm of education, cre­ating a positive learning setting is crucial. Mixe­d-gender schools play a vital role in nurturing such an e­nvironment by fostering a culture de­fined by mutual respect and support. This e­nvironment allows students to engage­ with one another, transcending ge­nder difference­s or similarities. Here, stude­nts feel both secure­ and encouraged to expre­ss themselves, facilitating the­ir learning and personal deve­lopment.

35. Developing cultural awareness: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a crucial role in nurturing students’ cultural aware­ness by exposing them to dive­rse cultures and traditions both on and off campus. This exposure­ helps them embrace­ and respect the world’s wide­-ranging diversity and intricacies.

36. Promoting gender equality: Mixed-gende­r schools play a pivotal role in fostering gende­r equality by addressing the re­percussions of gender bias and se­gregation. They offer stude­nts equal opportunities and outcomes in e­ducation and various facets of school and societal life, irre­spective of their ge­nder.

37. Fostering individual accountability: Coeducational institutions support students in nurturing their personal responsibility by fostering the development of their ability to exercise sound judgment and make informed, ethical choices, which is valuable for their academic and real-world pursuits.

38. Building resilience and adaptability: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a significant role in fostering re­silience and adaptability among students. By navigating challe­nges and setbacks, students not only le­arn but also thrive in the face of unce­rtainty, preparing them for life’s e­ver-changing landscapes.

39. Providing exposure to different perspectives: Providing students e­xposure to various perspective­s is a key benefit of mixe­d-gender schools. By facilitating encounte­rs with diverse viewpoints and e­xperiences, the­se schools stimulate critical thinking and enhance­ learning. Moreover, the­ presence of a varie­ty of individuals and outlooks broadens students’ horizons and fosters a more­ inclusive worldview.

40. Fostering a sense of belonging: Coeducational institutions play a vital role in nurturing a sense of inclusion among students. By interacting with peers and educators of diverse genders, students can experience acceptance and appreciation, fostering a connection and engagement within the school and broader community. This engagement enables them to actively engage in various social and civic initiatives within their educational institution and society.

41. Developing emotional intelligence: Deve­loping emotional intelligence­ can be facilitated through attending mixe­d-gender schools. These­ institutions provide a conducive environme­nt for students to comprehend and re­gulate their own as well as othe­rs’ emotions. Moreover, the­y foster the ability to empathize­ and demonstrate compassion towards both themse­lves and their pee­rs, particularly those facing hardships or distress.

42. Encouraging self-discovery: In the re­alm of self-discovery, coeducational institutions play a vital role­ in fostering students’ exploration of various role­s and behaviors, facilitating the unveiling and e­xpression of their identitie­s and personalities in a safe e­nvironment free from appre­hension about criticism or exclusion.

43. Building a strong sense of community: Coeducational institutions have the potential to cultivate a strong community ethos among students by promoting an environment characterized by mutual admiration and assistance. This setting allows students to engage in collaborative learning, transcending gender distinctions, while also empowering them to actively engage in various social and communal endeavors both within their educational institution and the broader society.

44. Fostering a culture of respect: Encouraging a culture of mutual respect can be facilitated by coeducational institutions where students learn to value and acknowledge both the distinctions and commonalities among individuals and viewpoints. Such schools also play a crucial role in promoting self-respect and respect for others, irrespective of gender.

45. Providing opportunities for personal growth: Mixed-ge­nder schools offer opportunities for pe­rsonal growth by providing a diverse range of subje­cts and activities catering to both gende­rs, including arts, sports, languages, and STEM. They also empowe­r students to explore and de­velop their passions and talents, bre­aking free from gende­r stereotypes and e­xpectations.

46. Encouraging a sense of curiosity: Encouraging curiosity in students: Coe­ducational schools play a vital role in fostering a sense­ of curiosity among students. This educational setting aids in cultivating and sustaining a positive­ and dynamic approach to both learning and life. Furthermore­, it serves to ignite the­ir creativity and inquisitiveness by e­xposing them to diverse pe­rspectives and real-world e­ncounters.

47. Building lifelong friendships: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a vital role in fostering e­nduring friendships among students. These­ schools facilitate the establishme­nt and nurturing of healthy, respectful re­lationships with peers of diverse­ genders. Such relationships not only e­nhance academic, social, and personal growth but also have­ the potential to exte­nd far beyond the confines of the­ educational institution.

48. Fostering a love for learning: In mixed-ge­nder schools, students can cultivate a passion for le­arning by embracing and valuing the diverse­ aspects of education. This environme­nt encourages them to strive­ for excellence­ and uphold quality in all their endeavors.

49. Developing a well-rounded skill set: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a vital role in nurturing students’ holistic skill se­ts. They provide a platform for students to cultivate­ and exhibit essential skills and mindse­ts crucial for thriving in a diverse and competitive­ global landscape. These include­ but are not limited to teamwork, le­adership, creativity, innovation, adaptability, resilie­nce, and perseve­rance.

50. Providing a foundation for future success: Mixed-ge­nder schools play a crucial role in laying the groundwork for stude­nts’ future success. They e­quip students with the nece­ssary skills and experience­s that are not only relevant but also e­ssential for their future care­ers and lives. Additionally, these­ schools promote equal opportunities and fair outcome­s in education and broader societal re­alms, irrespective of ge­nder.

To sum up, mixed-gender schools offer more advantages compared to single-gender schools. They enhance academic achievements, promote social growth, encourage diversity, and foster inclusivity, equipping students with a holistic education that readies them for practical life challenges.

Hence, advocating for and endorsing coeducational institutions is essential as they present students with optimal chances for academic, social, and personal growth. Additionally, fostering additional exploration and dialogue regarding this subject is crucial for enhancing our comprehension and enhancing the caliber of mixed-gender schooling.

Debates: Why are Single Gender Schools Better for Students?

A Comprehensive Guide to Debate Competitions for High School Students

The Power of Debating: 10 Reasons to Integrate Debate Skills in Education

Debate: Reasons Why Farmers are Better than Traders

Get real time update about this post categories directly on your device, subscribe now.

Debate: Top Reasons Why Day School is Better than Boarding School

Debate: why wealth is better than health., related posts.

Debate: Top Reasons why Lawyers are Better than Farmers

How to Introduce Myself in a Debate: Crafting an Impactful Self-Introduction

Debate: Top Reasons Why Lawyers are Better than Teachers

Debate: Top Reasons Why Farmers Are Better Than Teachers

Debate: Top Reasons Why Teachers Are Better Than Doctors.

Debate: top reasons why doctors are better than teachers.

Debate: Top Reasons Why Teachers Are Better Than Farmers

JAMB Cut-Off Marks for All Schools is Out for 2024/2025

Schools Whose Post-UTME Form are out for 2024/2025 (UPDATED)

Can a 16-year-old Enter University in 2024?

ADSU Cut-off Marks for all Course is out for 2024/2025: Check Here

UniAbuja Admission Requirements for Agricultural Extension Students

UniAbuja Admission Requirements for Agricultural Economics Students

UniAbuja Admission Requirements for Advertising Students

UNIABUJA Cut-off Mark for 2024/2025 Academic Session

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 Schooloaded - Edutainment

• Code of Conduct

19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Mixed Gender Schools

Mixed gender schools create an educational environment where boys and girls (or men and women) receive opportunities together. This coed system began to develop in the 19th century, and it today has become the standard in most cultures around the world. It is significantly different when compared to the same-gender education where each is segregated from the other.

The world’s oldest institution to focus on a co-educational experience is Dollar Academy in Scotland. It is a junior and senior school providing classes from the ages of 5-18, offering day systems and a boarding opportunity for families in the parish and surrounding area. About 1,250 students are currently enrolled here.

Then the first co-educational college was founded in 1833 in Oberlin, Ohio, with 44 students, although a full equal status for both genders did not occur until 1837. The first women graduating with bachelor’s degrees did so in 1840.

These are the advantages and disadvantages to consider when developing the structure and curriculum for mixed gender schools for each community.

List of the Advantages of Mixed Gender Schools

1. Students receive more access to diversity in a mixed-gender school. When students of all ages have access to more diversity in their educational environments, then their personal progress and grades are typically better. Kids who have classrooms which include people who only look or think just like them create an echo chamber that only support one world view. Having access to various perspectives and experiences creates more opportunities, reduces the mental effort needed to combat stereotypes, and improves the overall attitude of the institution.

When boys and girls are given access to each other at an early age in a secure environment like the school, then it becomes easier for them to adapt to changing conditions when they get older. It creates cultural and social advantages that can last for a lifetime.

2. Co-educational environments bridge the equality gap. Our world has made significant strides towards gender equality in the past century. Women’s suffrage movement around the globe have gained traction even in traditional societies where the role of the female is subservient to the men. By creating mixed-gender schools that offer equal opportunities to both genders, people can begin to see that we are humans first. Our gender identity becomes secondary to the overall societal role of our species.

Institutions which practice this philosophy treat their students equally with no preference to gender. That means assignments are given based on need instead of preconceived societal notions. No one receives any special treatment simply because they are a boy or a girl.

3. It promotes opportunities for socialization. Students who receive an education from institutions that encourage same-gender classrooms struggle to interact with members of the opposite sex after they graduate. This struggle can impact multiple layers of their life, including job opportunities which may require frequent interactions with someone of another gender.

By creating chances to practice social interactions in a safe environment while growing up, mixed-gender schools can help young students start building the foundation for their vocational and social future from kindergarten on up. By giving our children familiarity now when there is adult supervision present, we can prepare them for a world that is abandoning segregation policies rapidly.

4. Mixed-gender schools can prepare students for the real world. Although there are some advantages to consider with a same-gender school (especially for boys) when considering class availability, personal interactions, and acceptance, mixed-gender schools provide more preparation for what will happen in real life. The average person interacts with individuals from all gender identifications throughout their day. Understanding the similarities and differences that exist between each individual will make it easier to form relationships, find moments of success, and interact with future clients in meaningful ways.

Instead of creating a world where everyone heads toward their preferred comfort zone, mixed-gender schools offer an opportunity for the world to become a smaller place because we become accustomed to the idea that everyone should have the same chance to pursue dreams and find success that we get.

5. Co-educational environments can help to develop better communication skills. It can be uncomfortable to have a conversation with someone who feels like a stranger. When you do not receive exposure to different cultures, ethnicities, or genders during your formative years, then anyone who was outside of your personal circles would create social discomfort. We must find ways to communicate with one another in face-to-face situations because mobile devices and computer screens are not always available. By creating an opportunity to practice these interactions at a mixed-gender school, it can help students become confident in how they create an initial first impression.

“I don’t know that parents should have the opportunity to give their students an inferior education,” ACLU strategist Allie Bohm told NPR in 2014. “Many of the programs are based on and perpetrate gender stereotypes, which limit opportunities for boys and girls alike.”

6. It eliminates any justification for sexism in our educational environments. Women can receive numerous benefits during their career because of the opportunities that mixed-gender schools provide. According to the Pew Research Center, 42% of women in the United States say that they have faced discrimination issues in their job at least once. There is a broad array of personal experiences with this issue, ranging from wage gap problems to being passed over for essential assignments.

23% of women say that they have experienced treatment at work and where is as if they were not competent for the job that they were doing. Only 6% of men say the same thing. By creating more opportunities to work with one another in mixed-gender schools, we can begin to adjust our perspectives from a professional standpoint to create more equality.

7. Students can work up to the educational successes of their peers. Girls can average scores that are more than 30 points higher on a 600-point reading performance scale in almost every society. Using data from the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment, Margriet van Hek, who works as a sociologist at Utrecht University, found that boys can significantly improve their scores when their classroom composition is 60% or higher for the opposite gender. The scores are higher for girls in this structure as well.

Girls averaged a score just below 440 when their classroom composition was less than 60% of their gender. When they learned in mixed-gender schools with more than 60%, then their scores went above 450. Boys scored below 410 in the former example, and then at nearly 430 in the latter.

8. It reduces the costs that school districts would otherwise face. School districts in the United States often embrace the idea of having mixed-gender schools because it reduces their overall administrative costs. When you offer same-gender programs, then you must shift from one program to three: one for the boys, another for the girls, and then a mixed-gender option as well. Psychology Professor Janet Hyde at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and her team reviewed 184 single-gender education studies in 2014 and found that after the first year of segregating genders, there is no meaningful difference in the educational opportunities experience.

Using a total of 14 different outcomes, even the attitudes about learning, self-esteem, and performance were all equal.

List of the Disadvantages of Mixed Gender Schools

1. It defies the traditional roles of men and women in many societies. Ever since Sigmund Freud asserted in 1924 that biology is the primary determinant for gender identity, societies have been using body parts as a protective factor for an individual’s personal and professional path through life. Enduring gender norms from centuries of practice before Freud undoubtedly helped to create this famous hegemonic idea. Gender stereotypes can seem harmless, such as giving sporting equipment to the boys and dolls to the girls. The only problem here is that once individuals start seeing themselves in these definitions, they begin to define their confidence by them.

Mixed-gender schools challenge gender norms. This practice defies the traditional roles of men and women in many societies. Because it is something that is different, then this practice is sometimes feared. Instead of creating more educational opportunities, the presence of such an institution could create loathing and violence instead.

2. Mixed-gender schools can create problems with sexual distraction. Combining educational opportunities for boys and girls in the younger grades can often help students form friendships, focus on their homework, and provide equal access to local learning chances. As kids reach adolescence, the differences in gender can become a distraction thanks to normal biological reactions to one another. High schools and colleges can become a place of heartache and depression because of adverse reactions to relationship issues. Even a simple attraction to another person can reduce learning experiences.

This disadvantage is present to some extent in the same-gender schools as well. When comparing the two structures, the mixed-gender schools tend to underperform because there are more issues that revolve around our student’s self-consciousness.

3. This structure forces students to learn in unnatural ways. Boys and girls have a different biology because of their core gender differences. Men typically learn mathematics faster than women, but then they struggle in trying to pick up language, reading, and communication skills. When there is a mixed-gender school, the structure of the curriculum attempts to equalize boys and girls to learn through the same process. This issue impacts the learning opportunities for both because they receive exposure to methods that are not well-suited to their needs.

The presence of mixed-gender schools can promote equality in society, but it can also hold some students back from achieving their full potential.

4. It can create issues with academic performance. When students have an opportunity to learn in a same-gender environment, then there are typically fewer issues of intimidation and bullying. Kids tend to be less shy when in this type of institution as well. When children are feeling embarrassed or scared, then they usually will not interact in classroom settings as often as they would otherwise. This process creates a situation where they would not perform as well as they could, which is a problem mixed-gender schools often struggle with repetitively.

5. There is a risk of encouraging intimate relationships at an early age. Teens are already struggling with how their brain develops during these critical educational years. They become more impulsive, sometimes aggressive, and there is little regard for the long-term consequences of their choices. After the age of 13 (and sometimes younger), each decision tends to be more about short-term pleasure than the creation of future opportunities. By having mixed-gender schools, it creates more chances for students to become sexually active.

The CDC reports that over 50% of teenagers in the United States have had a sexual encounter before the age of 18. Most teams have their first intimate situation with someone who they consider to be a boyfriend or girlfriend. These statistics even hold for those who feel like premarital sex is against their religion or morals. It is an issue which is not as prevalent in same-gender schools.

6. Students may encounter issues with their self-esteem or confidence. Students typically have more confidence to speak up in class when they are attending a same-gender school. There are fewer issues with self-esteem because no one is trying to impress a member of the opposite gender or worry about what someone they like things about them. Girls are actually less confidence in mixed-gender schools because of the shyness they typically experience around the other gender. This issue is especially prevalent in subjects that are traditionally male-orientated, such as science, technology, engineering, and math.

7. It creates a double standard for girls in mixed-education environments. When schools create a co-educational setting for all students, then the administrators to hold to more of the traditional worldview on gender roles will apply different standards to boys than girls. Men are typically seen in society as being rugged, strong, and independent in the situations. Women are then viewed in the opposite way, sometimes being seen as fragile or even a sexual object.

School dress codes in a mixed-gender environment often discriminate against girls more than boys. In a recent review of the policy at East Longmeadow High School in Massachusetts, six out of the nine regulations were specific to female students before an update occurred. Women are often taught in these environments that their body causes negativity. Instead of teaching equality, they are taught that they must abide by the behaviors of boys because it is their fault if someone treats them poorly.

8. There can be issues in these schools for those with non-traditional gender identities. For the better part of 2,000 years, a majority of societies saw humanity as being two genders. It is a perspective that many people still feel is true despite the increased number of people who publicly identify somewhere else on the gender spectrum. These students do not always feel welcome in mixed-gender schools, which is another disadvantage that can apply to same-gender educational opportunities as well.

Some students feel like their gender identity is different from their assigned sex at birth. People who fall under the transgender umbrella may sometimes feel unrestricted by the typical gender stereotypes and roles. There are students who feel that they are neither, while others might identify with both simultaneously. Kids in this situation deserve the same opportunities for an education as anyone else.

9. It gives girls an advantage while providing a disadvantage to boys. “In coed schools, boys tend to populate the lower end of the academic spectrum,” Brad Adams, the Executive Director of the International Boys’ Schools Coalition told Our Kids. “Boys’ schools specialize in designing curriculum that hooks them into learning.” Adams describes the environment of mixed-gender schools as a “gender pressure cooker.” By creating same-gender classrooms, there is more time to explore various interests without the requirement to be in a stereotypical role that tends to be more prevalent when boys and girls go to school together.

10. Mixed-gender schools can increase the teacher-student ratio. From 1984 to 2015, the average student-teacher ratio for primary schools in the United States was 14.68 students per teacher. It reached a maximum of 16.17 students in 1995, while hitting a low of 13.59 in 2010. Because same-gender classrooms tend to have a smaller enrollment than mixed-gender schools, the classroom sizes tend to be smaller for each teacher. That means there are more opportunities for one-on-one instruction for each student. This structure may be why both genders excel in non-traditional societal roles in these environments compared to the times when they get to learn together.

11. Educational research suggests that same-gender schools can provide better outcomes. Education Professor Kathy Piechura-Couture at Stetson University studies the outcomes of mixed-gender schools with same-gender learning environments. She says that groups boys and girls separately instead of together creates more opportunities for their teachers to tailor their lessons to the needs of the student.

“From the last 12 years of research we’ve done, we’ve never had a mixed-gender class statistically outperform a single-gender class,” she told NPR in 2014. “On many occasions, we’ve had the single-gender classes outperform the mixed-gender ones.”

In a 2012 study looking at South Korean schools where students were randomly assigned to single-gender and coed classrooms, the kids who went to schools with only the same gender were more likely to attend a four-year college.

A Final Thought on Mixed-Gender Schools

The world is slowly progressing toward a global society where there is real equality between men, women, and other gender identities. In the past 100 years, we have shifted from a majority of people feeling that men are superior to women to having most individuals feel like both primary genders can contribute equally to the success of a household. Part of the reason for this change in perspective is the presence of mixed-gender schools.

Our future battles in this subject are going to involve students who do not identify specifically as being male or female. Local school districts are struggling with this new shift because many structures were built on the idea of mixing two groups of people together instead of more. The same discrimination issues that women once faced are now problems that non-binary, transgender, genderfluid, agender, bigender, intergender, and pangender students encounter in our educational systems.

The advantages and disadvantages of mixed-gender schools show us that we’ve come a long way in a short time, but there is still a lot of work left to be done. Every student deserves to receive a quality education so that they can pursue whatever dreams they may have. Now that we are bringing integration to men and women, we must provide the same opportunities for everyone on the gender spectrum.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Theoretical Arguments For and Against Single-Sex Schools: A Critical Analysis of the Explanations

2004, American Institutes for …

The question of whether single-sex schooling is preferable to coeducation for some or all students continues to be hotly debated. Much of the debate is philosophical and would be waged even if single-sex schooling were shown to be highly advantageous for one or more ...

Related Papers

Sara Goodkind

Revue française de pédagogie

Madonna Murphy

A systematic review of the research studies on single-sex schools lends some empirical support to the hypothesis that single-sex schools may be advantageous for both boys and girls in terms of promoting academic achievement with a greater degree of order and control in the classroom and fostering socio-emotional development and promoting positive peer interactions. Nevertheless there is a great need for more research with better experimental designs focusing on measures of moral growth and character development as specific aspects of socio-emotional development.

Hawbash M Rahim

Education Administration Quarterly

Suzanne Eckes , Stephanie McCall

IOSR Journals

This research work assesses the impact of single-sex education on EFL advanced students. It compares the performances of 20 A level graduate students from girl grammar school of Lycee des JeunesFillesToffa 1 er with their peers from coeducation schools at the university centre of Adjarra during their first year of English studies. The investigation consists of comparing both categories of students" scores in individual work, group work and collective work. A mixed methodology design has been adopted. The instruments include questionnaires, classroom observations and a survey of students" productions. The results show that single-sex education leads to socialization challenges which affect group and collective productions. This study suggests that instead of closing the remaining single-sex schools, the school authorities should organise activities with coeducational schools to help their students be more accustomed to an environment different from the gender-segregated one.

The Educational Forum

Lynda Wiest

G. Theoharis, & M. Scanlan (Eds.)(2015) Leadership for increasingly diverse schools (pp. 123-145). New York: Routledge

Margaret Grogan

A review of relevant recent research indicates that girls’ issues are generally off the radar screen in local pre-K-12 schools in the United States. This is particularly problematic because gender inequities continue to be perpetuated in schools through largely unconscious cultural mores and pedagogies. Gender inequities are deeply rooted in historical, philosophical, and cultural narratives of gender so that we, educators, are ourselves articulations of gender-based narratives. Moreover, the intersectionalities between gender, race, English speaking ability, sexuality, class, religion, ability, poverty etc. greatly exacerbate this problem. Together with their teachers, principals must develop critical self-awareness as well as intentional ways of thinking, responding, and acting if schools are to help offer many gender narratives from which our students can choose. Gender stereotypes limit the growth and development of both girls and boys. School leaders need to draw attention to t...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Devonne Lampkin

Los Angeles: Sudikoff Family Institute for Education …

Tayyaba Ghouri

Middle School Journal

Steven B Mertens

SSRN Electronic Journal

Verna Williams

Olive Sweetman

Bettina Love

American Educational Research Journal

Heather E Joshi

Rosemary Salomone

Margaret Signorella , Rebecca Bigler

Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs

Amani Hamdan

Gender and Sexuality in Education: A reader

Stephanie McCall

Urban Education

Terry K Flennaugh

Jere R. Behrman

Brandon Wolfe

Anny Schaefer

Dr. Tony (Kwame) Laing

Brandi Williams

A. Burçin Erarslan Başkurt

Helen Forgasz , Gilah Leder

maria pallotta-chiarolli

McGill Journal of Education/Revue des sciences de l' …

Robert Morrell

IJAR Indexing

Atefeh Taheryan

British Journal of Sociology of Education

Bob Lingard

Sex Education

Amanda Keddie

International Journal of Educational Development

Steven Klees

Nelly Stromquist

Alex A . Nkhwalume

Judith Abrahami-Einat PhD

Farhatullah khan

thomas palaima

Women's Studies in Communication

Meredith Neville-Shepard

Psycho-Educational Research Reviews

asiye toker gökçe

Shirley K Randell

HULYA KOSAR ALTINYELKEN , Marielle Le Mat

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Look Into Education

Education leadership: the pros and cons of co-ed vs single-sex education.

September 16th, 2021

The interactions between girls and boys at school influence how women and men relate as equals in the workplace. This is part of the reason why advocates for coeducation say it is a way to socialize young people so they are better prepared for their futures in the workforce and society.

Coeducation and Curricula

Coeducation is the integrated education of males and females at schools and learning facilities. Coeducational schools reflect the diversity of society. Co-ed schools typically offer a curriculum that is accessible to all students and encourages a wide range of learning opportunities. By minimizing gender-linked stereotypes in coursework, educational opportunities can appeal to individuals’ interests, aptitudes, and motivations as opposed to categories like gender.

On the other hand, proponents of single-sex education say students can also flourish academically in single-gender classrooms. The National Association for Single Sex Public Education (NASSPE) asserts that schools that use best practices for gender-specific teaching may be more successful at teaching to boys’ and girls’ strengths.

Research shows the benefits and drawbacks of both models of education. In the past few decades, studies, including a comparison of same-sex and coeducational schools by the U.S. Department of Education, produced mixed results that are not conclusive enough to fully endorse either. Researchers on both sides of the debate continue to work and adapt to current education trends.

Benefits of Co-ed and Single-Gender Formats

Education leaders must evaluate both the merits and obstacles of the different learning environments. Here are common arguments for both coeducation and single-sex education. 

The Case for Co-ed

• Offers school diversity—students will find it easier to adapt in many different environments.
• Teaches equality and tolerance—co-ed schools treat students to be tolerant of each other.
• Promotes socialization—students enrolled in mixed classrooms experience being with members of the opposite sex and are comfortable interacting with each other.
• Prepares students for the real world—students are exposed to an environment that reflects the larger society.
• Improves communication skills—studying in co-ed schools can help an individual communicate in different ways.
• Challenges sexism—a co-ed environment gives students the chance to express themselves and share their views.

The Case for Single-Gender Education

• Lessons tailored to unique interests and skills—curricula in single-sex classrooms are developed without the influence of social expectations based on gender roles.
• Ease of forming relationships—camaraderie forms naturally without concerns about cliques and social status. 
• Minimizes distractions—students focus more on academics and extracurriculars.
• Removes double standard—girls and boys might be held to obviously different standards in co-ed environments but might not in single-sex schools.
• Breaking down gender stereotyping—students confidently pursue interests without the assumption of female- and male-dominated subjects.
• More relaxed environment—there is less of a desire to impress the other gender.

How Aspiring School Leaders Can Maximize Student Success The debate over coeducation vs single-gender education is just one of several educators are facing today. School leaders must incorporate changing attitudes to build effective educational models. William Woods University’s Online Education Specialist in Educational Leadership degree prepares individuals who are often already teachers to be leaders at the school-district level. This Education Specialist degree program features courses like Issues in School Superintendency, which examines the historical perspectives and issues that superintendents face—knowledge that can help educators maximize student success.

Related posts:

• The Importance of Building Media Literacy Skills
• Education Leaders on Teaching Climate Change

Posted in Curriculum Advances , School Leaders

No Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Resurgence of Single-Sex Education

The benefits and limitations of schools that segregate based on gender

Defenders of same-sex schools hold fast to the belief that girls and boys benefit from separate academic instruction. Proponents often point to school experiences documented in landmark reports like The American Association of University Women’s “ How Schools Shortchange Girls ” as evidence of widespread inequities faced by girls in mixed classrooms. Same-sex educational settings are also offered as a way to improve lagging achievement for low-income students of color— mainly boys —in urban public schools. Conversely, opponents claim single-sex education perpetuates traditional gender roles and “ legitimizes institutional sexism ,” while neuroscientists refute the merits of gender differences between girl and boy brains. And rather than creating more equitable schools for nonwhite students, some critics compare separating boys and girls to racially segregated schooling. The disputes pitting ardent supporters against fervent detractors have done little to dampen popularity, however. The prevalence of single-sex public schools has risen and fallen over the years, yet the last decade has seen a major revival. According to the National Association for Single Sex Public Education, only 34 single-sex public schools were in operation in 2004 . That number jumped 25-fold in 10 years: The New York Times reported in 2014 that 850 schools nationwide had single-sex programs. With participation apparently on the upswing, the Department of Education’s civil-rights division offered guidelines on single-sex classes to K-12 public schools last year. Against this backdrop of renewed interest in single-sex schools and classes, the author Juliet A. Williams, a professor of gender studies and associate dean of the Division of Social Sciences at UCLA, takes a deep dive into the social aspects and framing of this hotly debated issue in a new book, The Separation Solution? Single-Sex Education and the New Politics of Gender Equality . She recently shared some thoughts with me on the subject. The interview that follows has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Melinda D. Anderson: A major thread running through the book is that so many people—educators, parents, activists, and politicians—strongly believe in the potential of single-sex education to unleash academic excellence, while the evidence supporting this claim is sparse and insufficient. What would you say is the primary driving force behind its well-entrenched support?

Juliet A. Williams: Some people believe in single-sex education because they had a great personal experience. To other people, single-sex education seems like plain old common sense: They see differences between boys and girls, and they like the idea of creating schools that reflect these differences. Still others look at the failure of U.S. public-school systems and think, “we’ve got to do something; let’s give it a try.” Since the 1990s, there has been a resurgence of interest in single-sex education in public schools serving students in grades K-12. My book takes a look at the arguments driving interest in single-sex public education, as well as the results. What I have found is that single-sex public-school initiatives have been created with the best of intentions, but that they are not delivering the results. At the same time, they are producing some unintended consequences in terms of reinforcing damaging gender stereotypes.

Anderson: Your freshman year at the Philadelphia High School for Girls, an all-girls public magnet for academically gifted students, is compared to “serving time in prison,” a characterization I found peculiar as a graduate of Girls’ High. With the exception of your brief stint in an all-girls school, The Separation Solution? lacks input from current students or alumni of K-12 single-sex schools. Could their perspectives have expanded your analysis of single-sex education? Williams: I’m pretty sure I would have experienced some measure of adolescent angst no matter where I went to school, and looking back, I think it would be a real mistake to conclude that it was because I happened to attend an all-girls [high school] as opposed to a coed one. By the same token, I suspect that many people who flourished in single-sex environments would have had an equally rewarding experience at a coed school. That’s the problem with relying on personal experience to assess what works in education, and what doesn’t. Think of it this way: If I were to write a book about new treatments for cancer, [I wouldn’t] go out and ask people whether they enjoyed their treatment. I would want to know about results. Our kids deserve to grow up in a society that takes their education every bit as seriously as we take our commitment to good medicine.   Anderson: The creation of single-sex academies in the 1950s throughout the South by anti-integrationists aiming to thwart Brown v. Board of Education and keep black boys from being in classrooms with white girls is an interesting tidbit. Today, K-12 single-sex programs are still mostly concentrated in southern states. Can you talk more about this historical footnote?

Williams: Mention single-sex education to most people today, and you are likely to conjure images of elite institutions in bucolic settings, where emphasis is placed not only on rigorously training young minds, but also on building character and developing self-confidence. As I discovered, however, behind the image of single-sex education’s rosy past lies the story of its disturbingly checkered history. After the Civil War, several of the nation’s increasingly diverse, urban school districts moved to create single-sex public high schools to appease xenophobic parents worried about the prospect of students from different ethnic, religious, and class backgrounds rubbing shoulders throughout the school day. In the years following the landmark Supreme Court ruling, the prejudice driving the retreat from coeducational public schools was even more flagrant … amidst racist panic about the inevitability of young white women and young black men forming social bonds across racial lines.

This history is important [yet] I don’t think there are any easy analogies to be drawn between racially segregated schools in the past, and single-sex schools in the present. Many single-sex programs have been initiated specifically to address the unmet needs of underserved students, particularly black and Latino young men, and there is no question that some of the very best single-sex public schools today are ones created to serve low-income students of color. What is a question [though] is whether these schools are great because they are single-sex. So far, there isn’t evidence to show that they are. Instead, the research shows that successful schools, whether single-sex or coed, tend to have certain things in common, like creating strong mentoring relationships and keeping class sizes to a manageable level. When this happens, students benefit—whether or not boys and girls [are separated].

Anderson: The claim that boys and girls are “hard wired” differently, namely the neuroscience of sex-based learning differences, has been refuted by scientific researchers. Still, a belief in its efficacy persists as an education-policy approach and in teacher professional development. How can this be more effectively countered? Williams: While researching this book I learned about a fascinating phenomenon called “the selective allure of neuroscientific information.” In a series of ingenious experiments, a team of Yale researchers found that even the citation of irrelevant neuroscience information can make certain claims seem more credible than they otherwise would be. What this means in practice is that we can be all too easily drawn into accepting even the most poorly substantiated claims about the differences between men and women, provided those claims come dressed up in the commanding rhetoric of “hard-wiring.” What I found is that many of today’s “gender-sensitive” pedagogies are sold to teachers and parents in a deceptively appealing pseudo-scientific jargon of sex difference. That’s not to say that there aren’t real differences between girls and boys. But it is to say that we should be very skeptical of anyone who claims that we can extrapolate from what currently is known. Despite the fact that much of the popular science of sex difference has been debunked, the past decade has seen a proliferation of public-school programs modeled on bogus teachings.

Anderson: The prospect of transgender students recalibrating the single-sex education debate is presented in the book, with the mission and practice of single-sex schooling upended “in new and important directions.” What do you see as the future of single-sex education as growing numbers of students no longer identify with a gender binary?

Williams: It will be interesting to see how single-sex schools address the issue of gender diversity moving forward. The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights has been clear that transgender and gender nonconforming students are entitled to protection from sex-based discrimination under Title IX. [All public and private elementary and secondary schools, school districts, colleges, and universities receiving any federal financial assistance must comply with Title IX] Further, all students are entitled to participate in school programs based on their gender identity. One place single-sex public schools may wish to look for guidance moving forward is to the nation’s private women’s colleges. In recent years, several of the most prestigious historically all-women’s colleges have revised their admissions statements to explicitly welcome applications from transgender and gender nonconforming students. In doing so, these colleges are taking important steps to ensure that their commitment to single-sex education doesn’t inadvertently perpetuate bias and intolerance. Anderson: A provision in No Child Left Behind in 2001 helped accelerate the growth of single-sex education—you describe a “surge of single-sex experiments” in public-school classrooms across the country. A co-sponsor of the provision allowing school districts to use grants for same-sex schools and classrooms was former New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who cast single-sex education as furthering public-school choice. Now a candidate for U.S. president, how do you think same-sex education might fare in a Hillary Clinton administration?

Williams: Many officials, including then Senator Hillary Clinton, saw single-sex public education as a promising reform strategy. At the time, federal money was set aside to encourage “experimentation” with single-sex approaches. Since then, hundreds of single-sex public-schooling initiatives have been launched. What have we learned? Predictably, fans of single-sex education loudly proclaim these experiments to be a success —and they have a few carefully chosen examples to prove it. But the real story lies in the overwhelming number of single-sex initiatives that have failed to produce positive results. In 2014, an exhaustive review found no significant proven advantages of single-sex schooling over coeducation, either for boys or for girls. With so many proven approaches to education reform out there, let’s invest in those. Our kids’ lives are too precious to experiment with.

About the Author

More Stories

Teaching Black Teens to Write the Books They Read

The Secret Network of Black Teachers Behind the Fight for Desegregation

Single sex v co-ed: which is better for kids' education?

For an issue that looms so large for parents and societies, there are surprisingly few controlled studies that compare single-sex and co-education schools.

Same-same: Markers that show differences between the genders narrowed to almost nothing by the time they got to year 11.

But some data that does exist, says Garry Falloon, Professor of STEM Education in the Macquarie School of Education, suggests that overall there is no reason for schools not to go co-ed, at least when judged by levels of student achievement.

Popular perceptions that girls do better at single-sex schools and boys at co-ed schools are generally  not supported by  studies, including Pahlke, Hyde and Allison’s 2014 meta-analysis involving 1.6 million kids in 21 countries. Available research indicates that for boys’ and girls’ schools considering going co-ed for social and cultural reasons, there appears to be no educational reason not to do so.

“Across the markers researchers used, looking at attitudes towards maths, science and performance, there was negligible difference – they used the words ‘minute at best’.” Falloon comments.

All the markers that show differences between the genders narrowed to almost nothing by the time they got to year 11.

Falloon also points to a more recent Queensland study that looked at the confidence levels of boys and girls attending single-sex high schools that found no difference between the two.

“What was really interesting, as a general rule of thumb, was that as kids got older and went through schooling systems, all the markers that show differences between the genders narrowed to almost nothing by the time they got to year 11.

“However,  in primary school boys had marginally better self-efficacy than girls did – that is, the sense of belief in one’s ability to do something, which we know is a strong determinant for achievement. But when they got to the middle school in years 7 and 8, the girls had started to catch up.”

The findings of the Queensland study, published last year in the Australian Journal of Career Development , supported those of the 2014 meta-analysis of 184 studies involving more than 1.6 million students from kindergarten to year 12 from 21 nations, including Australia.

Changing times: Single sex schools, historically based on assumptions about biological differences between genders, are becoming less common.

The meta-analysis researchers commented that: “A theoretical assumption underlying many single sex programs is the view that gender differences and psychological characteristics relevant to learning are substantial and are biological in nature – what we have called the large biological differences assumption.

“Boys therefore need to be taught differently. According to this view, boys and girls should have better outcomes in single-sex classrooms compared with co-educational classrooms. Data from this study does not support these assumptions. They show no substantial advantage for either boys or girls across an array of academic markers and outcomes.”

Single sex schools are becoming less common, Falloon points out. “If you look at the history, a lot of it was based on assumptions about biological differences between the genders, and that boys because of their physical and biological characteristics learn differently to girls.”

• New hope for sport head trauma patients
• How to kick those COVID kilos for good

In the Queensland study, for instance, an analysis of outside space at schools found that boys’ schools had a lot more of it – not counting playing fields, but the immediate space just outside classrooms.

“A lot of those ideas around boys needing large areas to run around and burn off energy and so on, are almost built into the environment of these schools. But those kinds of differences – or these assumptions that the ways boys and girls live demand a certain type of schooling –aren’t supported by the data in terms of achievement or self-efficacy.”

The study also reported that mixing genders tends to demystify and normalise relationships between the sexes.

“The Australian study reported that as the kids get older, they co-operate seamlessly together, and they relate together - differences diminish.”

The ‘girl power’ approach

The theory that girls are dominated by boys in co-ed classrooms – particularly in domains such as maths and science – and their performance therefore suffers, is again not supported by the 2014 meta-analysis, Falloon says.

Full speed ahead: A tendency for girls to engage more in sport and leadership in single-sex schools had diminished by the upper years of high school.

“Girls in single-sex schooling showed only trivial differences from those in co-ed schools for the outcomes of maths performance and attitude, and science performance,” Falloon says. “Moreover, girls’ educational aspirations were not higher when they were in single sex environments.”

One area that did have a small, negative effect on girls’ self-efficacy was gaming and social media, “which was not surprising really, given what we know about teens and social media”.

In single-sex schools, the meta-analysis found there was a tendency for girls to engage more in sport and leadership – aligning  with the perception that boys can often  be critical of girls’ engagement in sport – but any differences had diminished by the upper years of high school, and girls were engaging as much as boys at co-ed schools.

• Please explain: Why is petrol so expensive
• Tricks used by phone scammers exposed in new study

Falloon says when it comes to private single-sex schools, there are perceptions that children will have greater opportunities – “and that may be the case, but not necessarily because they achieve better, but because within those environments children may have connections and networks that can facilitate access to certain things that may not be available to others.”

Ultimately, it comes down to personal choice and what works best for individual children – and which social outcomes are valued.

“My personal opinion on this, if your son or daughter is thriving in a single sex environment, then don’t feel you have to change to co-ed … and vice versa,” says Falloon.

“When it comes to individuals, both  school types have their place.”

Garry Falloon (pictured) is a Professor in the Macquarie School of Education

Recommended Reading

Mixed Schools Vs Single Schools Essay

To compare mixed schools and single-sex schools – two fascinating options for learning. So, let’s put on our thinking caps and delve into the exciting adventure of discovering the differences between these two school styles.

Table of Contents

How To Write An Essay About Topic Mixed Schools vs. Single Schools

Step 1: collect essay writing ideas about your topic.

Before we dive in, let’s gather some exciting ideas about mixed schools and single-sex schools:

• Mixed Schools: Diversity: Mixed schools have boys and girls learning together, creating a diverse and inclusive environment.
• Friendships: Students can build friendships with a wider range of people, helping them learn about different perspectives.
• Learning Together: Boys and girls can work as a team, learning to collaborate and communicate effectively. Single-Sex Schools:
• Focused Learning: Students can focus better without distractions from the opposite gender.
• Tailored Approach: Teaching styles and activities can be adjusted to suit the preferences of a specific gender.
• Building Confidence: Students might feel more comfortable expressing themselves without worrying about gender stereotypes.

Step 2: Creating Essay Outline:

1. Introduction

Introduce the topic of mixed schools and single-sex schools, comparing them to different worlds of education.

2. Mixed Schools: Embracing Diversity

Discuss the benefits of mixed schools, where boys and girls learn together, fostering diversity and inclusivity.

3. Mixed Schools: Forging Friendships

Explore how mixed schools allow students to create friendships across genders, contributing to a broader understanding of perspectives.

4. Mixed Schools: Collaborative Learning

Highlight the advantages of learning and collaborating with peers of both genders, promoting teamwork and communication skills.

5. Single-Sex Schools: Focused Learning

Examine the benefits of single-sex schools, where students can concentrate on learning without the distractions of the opposite gender.

6. Single-Sex Schools: Personalized Approach

Discuss how teaching methods and activities can be tailored to cater to the preferences and learning styles of a specific gender.

8. Single-Sex Schools: Boosting Confidence

Explore the idea that single-sex schools might help students feel more confident in expressing themselves.

9. Balancing Act

Acknowledge that both mixed schools and single-sex schools have their merits, and it’s essential to consider various factors before forming an opinion.

10. Final Thoughts

Summarize the main points presented and encourage readers to appreciate the diversity of school styles and their impacts on education.

Writing the Essay about Mixed Schools vs. Single Schools

Introduction.

Stepping into the fascinating worlds of mixed schools and single-sex schools. It’s like comparing two games with unique rules and strategies. lets know the difference.

Mixed Schools – Embracing Diversity

Think of mixed schools as gatherings where boys and girls learn side by side, like different characters coming together in a game. One of the cool things about mixed schools is that they celebrate diversity. Just like in a game where each character brings something unique, boys and girls in mixed schools bring different perspectives and experiences. This creates an inclusive environment where everyone can learn from one another.

Mixed Schools – Forging Friendships

Mixed schools as big team quests, where boys and girls form friendships across the gender divide. It’s like characters from different game worlds coming together to solve challenges. In mixed schools, students have the chance to make friends with people who might think differently, helping them understand the world from various angles. It’s like unlocking a secret level of understanding.

Mixed Schools – Collaborative Learning

Mixed schools as cooperative missions, where boys and girls team up to achieve goals. Just like in a game where characters need to communicate and work together, mixed schools encourage collaboration. Students learn to communicate effectively and solve problems as a team. It’s like leveling up their teamwork and leadership skills for the real world.

Single-Sex Schools – Focused Learning

Now, let’s step into the world of single-player mode, where students focus on learning without distractions. In single-sex schools, boys and girls study separately, like characters on their solo quests. This can help them concentrate better, without worrying about what others might think. It’s like having a quiet space in a game where you can focus on completing challenges.

Single-Sex Schools – Personalized Approach

For example, a game that’s tailored to your preferences, with challenges that suit your strengths. Single-sex schools offer a similar experience. Teachers can adjust their teaching styles and activities to match the preferences of a specific gender. Just like characters in a game with different abilities, students in single-sex schools can explore topics in ways that resonate with them.

Single-Sex Schools – Boosting Confidence

Think of single-sex schools as safe havens where students feel comfortable expressing themselves. It’s like characters in a game having the confidence to try new strategies without worrying about judgment. In single-sex schools, students might feel more confident to speak up, ask questions, and participate actively. It’s like gaining a power-up that boosts their self-assurance.

Balancing Act

Now, let’s pause and take a deep breath. Like in a game where players need to choose different strategies, choosing between mixed schools and single-sex schools is a decision that involves careful consideration. Each option has its strengths and benefits, and it’s essential to think about what matters most to you and your learning journey.

Final Thoughts

As we wrap up our journey through the worlds of mixed schools and single-sex schools, remember that education is like a vast and diverse game with many levels to explore. Whether you’re navigating the paths of mixed schools to celebrate diversity or venturing into the personalized challenges of single-sex schools, both options offer unique experiences. Just like in a game where players appreciate the diversity of characters and strategies, let’s celebrate the diversity of school styles and the impact they have on our educational quests.

Hello! Welcome to my Blog StudyParagraphs.co. My name is Angelina. I am a college professor. I love reading writing for kids students. This blog is full with valuable knowledge for all class students. Thank you for reading my articles.

Related Posts:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Single-sex education: the pros and cons

by: Kristin Stanberry | Updated: May 7, 2024

Print article

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?

Homes Nearby

Homes for rent and sale near schools

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

6 surprising things insiders look for when assessing a high school

Surprising things about high school

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

• June 17 Myrna's Mystifying Mind-Boggler
• May 30 Iran, Answer This: "Do you plan to jail everyone until they either submit or die? Do you plan to persecute your people, until there are no people left?"
• May 28 Ryan Gosling Falls Into Action With "The Fall Guy"
• May 24 Israel-Hamas Campus Demonstrations Have Led To Commencement Cancellations and Arrests
• May 17 Anthony Edwards: The Next Michael Jordan?
• May 17 Venice High Arts Guild Receives WIN Grant
• May 13 TikTok Ban Likely As Congress Passes New Law
• May 6 Campus Parking Has Been Closed Off To Students With No Other On-Campus Options
• May 6 Venice Slam Team Comes First Place In Get Lit Competition
• May 1 Venice High Phone Policy Update

The Oarsman

Mixed gender vs. single gender schools.

Magali Sanchez

Magali Sanchez , Editor in Chief of Website March 22, 2017

I believe that mixed gender schools are better and more beneficial for students. Students are young and school is the main place where they learn and develop their social skills. It is where they learn to adapt to different types of environments that they may encounter now and in the future.

“Co-education creates a feeling of comradeship. I advocate teaching both genders in the same institution without showing any discrimination,” said the Greek philosopher Plato.

LAUSD has recently opened an all girls school The GALA in Mid City. They plan on opening an all boys school on the campus of Washington Preparatory High School in 2017-2018, according to dailynews.com

A mixed gender school expresses more diversity within the school and it teaches equality. Students will be able to express themselves as they wish, being a girl, boy, transgender, nonbinary, gay, lesbian etc. Some may feel scared to express themselves or come out when going to single sex school because they might feel like they don’t fit in. At mixed-gender schools, students get equal opportunities for learning. Boys and girls and everyone in between will be taught and treated the same with no sex preference. Students are graded and evaluated on the work they submit, not on what their gender is. Working together in the classroom and on homework assignments provides boys and girls the opportunity to learn from each other intellectually, as well as socially, according to stac.school.nz.

It is not yet scientifically proven that single sex schools like The Gala are more beneficial for them. It may provide the student with more attention but it does have a down side to it. When students go to a single-gender school, they are not as socially equipped to interact with the “mixed-gender” society, according to a report on the website Mental Health in Schools at UCLA. They miss out on vital interactive skills they get when interacting with the opposite sex. They will have trouble and may need some time to adjust to the real world when they leave their schools.

Not all teachers are specifically taught how to teach in a single gender environment. They also don’t have specific technique training on how to teach or approach something with a single sex classroom, according to Niche.com

Single sex schools are not the real world because people aren’t only going to interact with people of the same sex or gender. Once someone leaves the school it will be a whole another world out there. Kids should be learning to coexist with each other from the time they start school and not be segregated by gender, because the day they enter school is the day they enter the real world.

“Education is not a preparation for life; education is life itself,” said philosopher and educational reformer John Dewey.

Do you plan to return to in-person learning this semester?

• Yes (70%, 158 Votes)
• No (30%, 68 Votes)

Total Voters: 226

• Polls Archive

veniceoarsman

Comments (89)

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Oyin • Feb 20, 2024 at 11:16 AM

This is educational I like it

Dorcas • Feb 19, 2024 at 12:28 PM

Thanks this helps a lot for me

Ordained Work • Nov 14, 2023 at 11:16 AM

Highly informative thanks a lot

Precious • Sep 27, 2023 at 3:24 AM

Ahh I love this eassy ,it will really help me in my debate tomorrow Thank you very much ?

Bella Speake • Sep 23, 2023 at 12:05 PM

This will help in school tomorrow. Thanks ? a million ❤

Bella Speake • Sep 23, 2023 at 12:03 PM

Thanks this help a lot

olaolu adepoju • May 22, 2023 at 1:40 PM

Thank for the information ❤️❤️

Ogechi Celestina Ojiaka • May 8, 2023 at 10:18 AM

This will really help me in my usual debate

Olaide Ogunlade • Feb 27, 2023 at 12:17 PM

This should be of help Thanks a lot for the answer

tyler • Feb 27, 2023 at 5:09 AM

Samuel ifeanyi • Feb 12, 2023 at 3:46 AM

Who wrote this is amazing ??

Amamah Hannah • Jan 11, 2023 at 12:21 PM

This is really Great!

Dorsa • Jan 4, 2023 at 5:54 PM

Hi , I am Dorsa and I wanna bring up another side I was born in Iran. FYI It’s a country in middle east. I’ve been going to single-sex schools for pretty much 8 years now. I am 14 There’s a looooooot wrong with it . All of the schools in Iran are single-sex ( they’re supposed to be) I don’t know how to communicate with boys , neither do my friends,my classmate, no one In our country boys are alway considered more important and better by the government, people and TEACHERS. So if one day our schools are mixed gendered like it used to be back in the day.. It would be a disaster cause teachers would automatically treat boys better The opposite of It was mentioned in the essay

Esther • Nov 8, 2022 at 11:40 AM

This will help me in school thank you

Atombay • Nov 5, 2022 at 7:09 AM

Can u write more argument against single sex school .this is very nice .it will help me in school

Kelly Kay • Oct 31, 2022 at 4:48 PM

It wonderful and readable

Delight • Sep 25, 2022 at 10:11 AM

Whosoever that wrote this is a mind blower…..as in this is outrageous,this is wonderful ?…. It will surely help out in different schools ? nice job ?☺️

InI • Aug 25, 2022 at 11:43 AM

I love it ??

Mia • May 30, 2022 at 2:39 PM

Can you make an argument against single-sex school essay??

Violet Yusuf • Jun 2, 2023 at 5:40 PM

Samuel Asantr • Apr 4, 2022 at 2:07 PM

This will help me in school

Soliat odunola • Jun 20, 2023 at 8:18 AM

Abdul • Jan 6, 2024 at 8:18 AM

That’s great ??

Adefowope Dorcas • Jan 11, 2022 at 11:08 AM

Infact I love this essay it will help in my debate tomorrow,Thanks so much.

Kelly Kay • Oct 31, 2022 at 4:45 PM

Alyssa • Jan 4, 2023 at 5:57 PM

Ikr it’ll help me with my debate too! One of the best essays ever!

Eze Favour • Nov 8, 2021 at 12:21 PM

This will help me out in school I love it

Fatai fawas • Jul 11, 2021 at 9:51 AM

Thanks to the author of this essay as it would help me at school tomorrow

Christy • Jun 18, 2021 at 8:59 AM

whoever wrote this is amazing It’s mind blowing?

Christy • Jun 18, 2021 at 8:56 AM

A very interesting essay ☺️

Young G? • Apr 26, 2021 at 9:50 AM

I love this

JULIE • Apr 21, 2021 at 12:58 PM

Nice and beautiful write up keep it up

Young savages • Apr 21, 2021 at 12:56 PM

It is good work and also the best debate

AKUA • Apr 20, 2021 at 1:28 PM

Your points are definitely going to help my team win the debate tomorrow. THANKS FOR POSTING

Perfection • Apr 20, 2021 at 1:10 PM

I love the article written up there. its meaningful and it really helped me in my debate competition,like seriously ? kudos to you guys love yaaa.

Peculiar • Mar 25, 2021 at 10:58 AM

Me too it really helped me with some points in my debate team. I really liked all thes3 facts about mixed schools it is really encouraging. Thanks so much

Abby • Mar 16, 2021 at 3:35 PM

It really helped me a lot thanks for the article

Vera • Mar 11, 2021 at 1:58 AM

I love this and I’m using it for an assignment

Abass rahmotallah • Mar 6, 2021 at 10:08 AM

I love the write up It’s just the simple truth

risindu abeyrathna from sri lanka • Feb 27, 2021 at 8:45 PM

Thank you I am going to use this to show my judges in my speech that impact done by mixed schools is good for students

Ekiye Victory Ebitare • Feb 22, 2021 at 8:36 AM

It was Amazing

Tater Daniel • Feb 18, 2021 at 1:20 PM

Wiley • Feb 17, 2021 at 10:41 AM

I think this is the best essay guide anyone can get

Moro Eric • Feb 16, 2021 at 9:18 PM

Thanks, this is great

Kelle • Feb 15, 2021 at 10:12 AM

This is better without other sex how will we Know more about each other Thank you for this may God bless you

Marvis • Feb 7, 2021 at 4:37 AM

This article really helped me alot for my debate assignment, mixed system of education is more better and effective than single sex education

Miat • Jan 25, 2021 at 8:57 AM

A well written essay??

Dayendree • Jan 24, 2021 at 10:11 AM

At the same time single sex education is better to, specially for girls. Interaction is a thing where we can learn from the society, its a thing that on goes with life. Going to a single sex school doesn’t bother that environment. What is being done in these schools is they focus and give prior to the gender on studies. The world thinks that girls should limit there education and learn house hold stuff. But from same gender education, specially girl schools, they give priority to a girls education. We get confidence to work without a support of a male .It gives us confidence in whatever we do. It takes out our personality hidden within . It helps us to live with INDEPENDENCY!

Amoako Alex • Nov 28, 2020 at 3:47 AM

This article is really educative

Yusuf Rahmat • Nov 15, 2020 at 2:17 AM

This is good and fantastic point about mixed education is better than single sex education really enjoy it

[email protected] • Nov 11, 2020 at 1:22 PM

This is good and fantastic. It has really helped me with my homework.so nice and awesome

Silas • Nov 9, 2020 at 11:13 AM

This article is the best of all

Joelle Joannie • Oct 15, 2020 at 1:34 PM

it is intresting to do in note it helped me in my home work

Joelle Joannie • Oct 15, 2020 at 1:33 PM

it is intresting

DOREEN MARIE • Sep 29, 2020 at 11:14 AM

THIS ARTIKLE IS SO GOOD AND IT HAS HELPED ME SO MUCH IN DOING COURSE WORKS AND HOME WORKS.

Enoch Mensah • Aug 20, 2020 at 1:13 PM

Be mindful of your school

Hey hey • Aug 10, 2020 at 10:53 AM

This article will help me with my assignment Thanks and I agree to the fact that mixed gender schools are great ?

Ian Wolstenholme • Jul 15, 2020 at 8:44 AM

I go to an all boys school. I now feel bad about myself

Mihraban • Apr 1, 2020 at 12:00 AM

Mixed school is better than single school

Gagan • Mar 27, 2020 at 3:50 PM

This article was really helpful. I got onto my schools’ national debate team. I really thank who wrote this.

ISAIAH • Mar 8, 2020 at 6:33 AM

THIS WAS REALLY AMAZING. IT HELPED ME ALOT. THANKS KEEP IT UP

Ibekwe Gregory • Feb 7, 2020 at 12:38 PM

With this, i will do well in the exam Hall tomorrow. This is just what i need to make it in exam Hall tomorrow. I have this particular topic to write on tomorrow.

Well articulated. Natured writer

I appreciate.

Dani • Feb 5, 2020 at 11:11 AM

I really really really loved your topic,it helped me in my assignment,debate topic and many more thanks a lot?

yahya • Jan 18, 2020 at 10:05 PM

the points about mixed schools are very good

####### • Jan 10, 2020 at 12:45 PM

This really helped me with my persuasive paper in class! THANK YOU!!!!!!

Emi Lan • Dec 6, 2019 at 3:58 AM

Gender mixed schools are beneficial based on these points but to me, single-sex schools are better because of the need for maximum concentration in the students’ studies. I attend a single-sex school and I have a debate on this topic with a gender-mixed school. So, I am supporting the motion which says that; ‘Single-Sex School Is Better Than Gender Mixed School’. I HOPE WE WIN!

Suzanne • Nov 5, 2019 at 4:06 PM

This will really help me with my homework

chathuri • Oct 10, 2019 at 10:00 AM

good but not enough points

Peace • Aug 22, 2019 at 4:54 AM

This is good and fantastic it has really helped me with my summer assignment

SEGXY • Aug 19, 2019 at 7:14 AM

Make sense And a Standard writing of essay.

Kella • Jul 20, 2019 at 1:33 PM

It has really helped me out with my debate

Prince • Jul 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM

This points are very important

Eric Asaah • Jul 2, 2019 at 1:12 PM

Well, I like this article a lot. It is very well written and nicely presented. Infact, it has covered almost everything about the importance of co-educational life/life in mixed sex schools. More to the point I don’t think there is any and major and reliable point to be discussed about the importance of co-education. (i.e on my own speculation about it). Thanks a lot.

Hafsoh • Jun 12, 2019 at 1:19 PM

This article has really helped for my assignment

Uche ononiba • May 9, 2019 at 1:41 PM

That was so great@:-):-P:-O;-):-(

Queen Me • May 2, 2019 at 5:38 AM

This really helped me to get into my debate team! Thanks a lot 🙂

Chibuzo • Mar 13, 2019 at 8:14 AM

This is amazing write up. It has helped my daughter for her assignment.

yass queen • Mar 10, 2019 at 2:11 PM

I’m writing a term paper on this and it really helped me thank you.

Precious • Feb 25, 2019 at 12:03 PM

This article has really educated me on co-ed and single sex education

Precious • Feb 25, 2019 at 12:01 PM

This article is well written ,and it really helped me with my homework

Gambo ladan • Feb 17, 2019 at 1:02 AM

It is good for me who has a debate on it

keira • Feb 4, 2019 at 1:18 AM

This article was amazing and as a student being in a mixed schools it nice to learn about this and it helped me with my homework.

Diane • Jan 20, 2019 at 6:54 AM

I think co-education is better .This is fantastic writeup simply amazing

Jade • Jan 19, 2019 at 9:49 AM

This is so good, it will really help me with my debate on the same topic

nonono • Nov 12, 2018 at 8:05 AM

this is art it can’t be called bad…or good

Oof Yourself • Nov 11, 2018 at 3:46 AM

This article is well written.

Aliyah • Oct 3, 2018 at 4:00 PM

I am so happy on hearing this comment about mixed school

Caitlyne • Sep 5, 2018 at 3:05 AM

This is truly an amazing written point of view! I’m using some of this information in my speech on why co-ed schools are better compared to same-sex. I agree to all of these opinions and statements and admire the fact you have taken information from experts and also play on the emotions a tiny bit.

Helen • Nov 18, 2023 at 12:48 AM

It will also be of help to me at school

IELTS Essay: Mixed Schools with Boys and Girls

by Dave | General Training | 1 Comment

This is an IELTS writing task 2 sample answer essay on the topic of the whether or not schools should be mixed with boys and girls or they should separate the genders from the real IELTS exam.

Please consider supporting me on Patreon.com/howtodoielts to receive my exclusive IELTS Ebooks – you can even sign up for private live lessons with me!

Some feel that schools should be mixed with both girls and boys attending while others feel the genders ought to be separated.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

While certain concerned individuals feel that education is superior in single-sex schools, others value the integration of genders. In my opinion, though there are advantages related to focus from segregating the sexes, students benefit socially from mixed schools.

Those who are in favor of separating the genders argue students will be more dedicated to their studies. The reasons for this are largely self-evident as many of the interactions between boys and girls after they reach puberty can be distracting. There is even strong evidence that girls-only schools engender better standardized results. A recent study of institutions in Europe indicated that students at female-only schools scored higher on average on national exams. There might be a variety of reasons for this but many have seized on gender segregation as the primary catalyst for increased concentration and thus improved overall academic achievement.

However, the single study mentioned above does not discount the social value of schools featuring both genders. School is a place to develop not only academically, but socially as well. The fact that there may be uncomfortable interactions between girls and boys while they mature is not a drawback but a learning experience. Boys and girls, as they become men and women, will slowly learn how to talk with the opposite sex and find themselves in a better situation upon graduation. Without the opportunity to integrate socially with another gender there is a strong chance they will have difficulty communicating later and this may promote a lifelong habit of centering their social interactions on rigid gender groups.

In conclusion, despite the positive impact on attention that separating boys and girls can have, the maturing effect of mixed classrooms is more important. There is a place for single-sex institutions but the majority should include both.

1. While certain concerned individuals feel that education is superior in single-sex schools, others value the integration of genders. 2. In my opinion, though there are advantages related to focus from segregating the sexes, students benefit socially from mixed schools.

• Paraphrase the overall essay topic.
• Write a clear opinion. Read more about introductions here .

1. Those who are in favor of separating the genders argue students will be more dedicated to their studies. 2. The reasons for this are largely self-evident as many of the interactions between boys and girls after they reach puberty can be distracting. 3. There is even strong evidence that girls-only schools engender better standardized results. 4. A recent study of institutions in Europe indicated that students at female-only schools scored higher on average on national exams. 5. There might be a variety of reasons for this but many have seized on gender segregation as the primary catalyst for increased concentration and thus improved overall academic achievement.

• Write a topic sentence with a clear main idea at the end.
• Explain your main idea.
• Develop it with specific examples.
• Keep developing it fully.
• You can have some long sentences like this to really argue your point.

1. However, the single study mentioned above does not discount the social value of schools featuring both genders. 2. School is a place to develop not only academically, but socially as well. 3. The fact that there may be uncomfortable interactions between girls and boys while they mature is not a drawback but a learning experience. 4. Boys and girls, as they become men and women, will slowly learn how to talk with the opposite sex and find themselves in a better situation upon graduation. 5. Without the opportunity to integrate socially with another gender there is a strong chance they will have difficulty communicating later and this may promote a lifelong habit of centering their social interactions on rigid gender groups.

• Write a new topic sentence with a new main idea at the end.
• Explain your new main idea.
• Include specific details and examples.
• Continue developing it…
• as fully as possible!

1. In conclusion, despite the positive impact on attention that separating boys and girls can have, the maturing effect of mixed classrooms is more important. 2. There is a place for single-sex institutions but the majority should include both.

• Summarise your main ideas.
• Include a final thought. Read more about conclusions here .

What do the words in bold below mean? Make some notes on paper to aid memory and then check below.

While certain concerned individuals feel that education is superior in single-sex schools , others value the integration of genders . In my opinion, though there are advantages related to focus from segregating the sexes, students benefit socially from mixed schools .

Those who are in favor of separating the genders argue students will be more dedicated to their studies. The reasons for this are largely self-evident as many of the interactions between boys and girls after they reach puberty can be distracting . There is even strong evidence that girls-only schools engender better standardized results . A recent study of institutions in Europe indicated that students at female-only schools scored higher on average on national exams . There might be a variety of reasons for this but many have seized on gender segregation as the primary catalyst for increased concentration and thus improved overall academic achievement .

However, the single study mentioned above does not discount the social value of schools featuring both genders. School is a place to develop not only academically, but socially as well. The fact that there may be uncomfortable interactions between girls and boys while they mature is not a drawback but a learning experience. Boys and girls, as they become men and women, will slowly learn how to talk with the opposite sex and find themselves in a better situation upon graduation . Without the opportunity to integrate socially with another gender there is a strong chance they will have difficulty communicating later and this may promote a lifelong habit of centering their social interactions on rigid gender groups .

For extra practice, write an antonym (opposite word) on a piece of paper to help you remember the new vocabulary:

certain concerned individuals some people

superior better

single-sex schools schools with just boys or just girls

value consider important

integration combining

genders sexes, men and women/boys and girls

related to concerning

focus pay attention

segregating keeping apart

benefit socially gain from it in terms of interacting with others

mixed schools schools with both boys and girls

those who are in favor of supporters

separating keeping apart

argue claim

dedicated more focused and diligent

largely self-evident mostly obvious

interactions communicating

puberty when children begin to become mature

distracting take their focus away

strong evidence clear support

girls-only schools schools where there are not boys

engender create

standardized results scores on tests

institutions schools

indicated shown

female-only schools no boys schools

scored higher on average got better marks generally

on national exams tests for the whole country

variety lots of different

seized on pointed out

primary catalyst main cause

concentration focus

thus therefore

improved overall academic achievement better performance in school

single alone, one

mentioned above detailed before

discount not consider, ignore

social value importance for communicating with others

featuring having

uncomfortable interactions awkward conversations

mature old, experienced

drawback disadvantage

learning experience good way to mature

opposite sex the other gender

find themselves in a better situation better off for it

graduation after finishing school

without not having

integrate combine

strong chance good probability

later after that

promote encourage

lifelong habit they will do their whole life

social interactions talking with others

rigid gender groups fixed boy/girl groups

despite regardless of

positive impact good for

maturing effect makes you more mature

single-sex institutions one gender schools

Pronunciation

Practice saying the vocabulary below and use this tip about Google voice search :

ˈsɜːtn kənˈsɜːnd ˌɪndɪˈvɪdjʊəlz   sju(ː)ˈpɪərɪə   ˈsɪŋgl-sɛks skuːlz ˈvæljuː   ˌɪntɪˈgreɪʃən   ˈʤɛndəz rɪˈleɪtɪd tuː   ˈfəʊkəs   ˈsɛgrɪgeɪtɪŋ   ˈbɛnɪfɪt ˈsəʊʃəli   mɪkst skuːlz ðəʊz huː ɑːr ɪn ˈfeɪvər ɒv   ˈsɛpəreɪtɪŋ   ˈɑːgjuː   ˈdɛdɪkeɪtɪd   ˈlɑːʤli sɛlf-ˈɛvɪdənt   ˌɪntərˈækʃənz   ˈpjuːbəti   dɪsˈtræktɪŋ strɒŋ ˈɛvɪdəns   gɜːlz-ˈəʊnli skuːlz   ɪnˈʤɛndə   ˈstændədaɪzd rɪˈzʌlts ˌɪnstɪˈtjuːʃənz   ˈɪndɪkeɪtɪd   ˈfiːmeɪl-ˈəʊnli skuːlz   skɔːd ˈhaɪər ɒn ˈævərɪʤ   ɒn ˈnæʃənl ɪgˈzæmz vəˈraɪəti   siːzd ɒn   ˈpraɪməri ˈkætəlɪst   ˌkɒnsənˈtreɪʃən   ðʌs   ɪmˈpruːvd ˈəʊvərɔːl ˌækəˈdɛmɪk əˈʧiːvmənt ˈsɪŋgl   ˈmɛnʃənd əˈbʌv   ˈdɪskaʊnt   ˈsəʊʃəl ˈvæljuː   ˈfiːʧərɪŋ   ʌnˈkʌmfətəbl ˌɪntərˈækʃənz   məˈtjʊə   ˈdrɔːbæk   ˈlɜːnɪŋ ɪksˈpɪərɪəns ˈɒpəzɪt sɛks   faɪnd ðəmˈsɛlvz ɪn ə ˈbɛtə ˌsɪtjʊˈeɪʃən   ˌgrædjʊˈeɪʃən wɪˈðaʊt   ˈɪntɪgreɪt   strɒŋ ʧɑːns   ˈleɪtə   prəˈməʊt   ˈlaɪflɒŋ ˈhæbɪt   ˈsəʊʃəl ˌɪntərˈækʃənz   ˈrɪʤɪd ˈʤɛndə gruːps dɪsˈpaɪt   ˈpɒzətɪv ˈɪmpækt   məˈtjʊərɪŋ ɪˈfɛkt   pleɪs   ˈsɪŋgl-sɛks ˌɪnstɪˈtjuːʃənz  

Vocabulary Practice

I recommend getting a pencil and piece of paper because that aids memory. Then write down the missing vocabulary from my sample answer in your notebook:

While c_________________________________s feel that education is s__________r in s__________________s , others v______e the i__________n of g_____________s . In my opinion, though there are advantages r_______________s from s______________g the sexes, students b_______________y from m______________s .

T_____________________________f s_____________g the genders a_______e students will be more d____________d to their studies. The reasons for this are l__________________t as many of the i______________s between boys and girls after they reach p_________y can be d___________g . There is even s__________________e that g_____________________s e__________r better s_____________________s . A recent study of i________________s in Europe i_____________d that students at f_________________s s___________________________e o________________s . There might be a v_________y of reasons for this but many have s____________n gender segregation as the p__________________t for increased c_____________n and t______s i________________________________________t .

However, the s__________e study m__________________e does not d___________t the s_____________e of schools f_____________g both genders. School is a place to develop not only academically, but socially as well. The fact that there may be u___________________________s between girls and boys while they m______e is not a d___________k but a l__________________________e. Boys and girls, as they become men and women, will slowly learn how to talk with the o_____________x and f____________________________________n upon g______________n . W__________t the opportunity to i____________e socially with another gender there is a s________________e they will have difficulty communicating l_______r and this may p__________e a l_____________t of centering their s__________________s on r_____________________s .

In conclusion, d___________e the p_____________t on attention that separating boys and girls can have, the m______________t of mixed classrooms is more important. There is a p______e for s______________________s but the majority should include both.

Listening Practice

Learn more about this topic in the video below and practice with these activities :

Reading Practice

Read more about this topic and use these ideas to practice :

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-35419284

Speaking Practice

Practice with the following speaking questions from the real IELTS speaking exam :

• Are you studying or working?
• Do you prefer to learn in the morning or in the evening?
• What subject do like to study best?

Writing Practice

Practice with the related IELTS essay topic below:

In many schools and universities today, women have a tendency to study the humanities (such as the arts and languages) while men more often major in science related subjects. Some believe this tendency should be changed.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answer Essay: Gender & Study (Real Past IELTS Exam/Test)

Recommended For You

Latest IELTS Writing Task 1 2024 (Graphs, Charts, Maps, Processes)

by Dave | Sample Answers | 147 Comments

These are the most recent/latest IELTS Writing Task 1 Task topics and questions starting in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and continuing into 2024. ...

Recent IELTS Writing Topics and Questions 2024

by Dave | Sample Answers | 342 Comments

Read here all the newest IELTS questions and topics from 2024 and previous years with sample answers/essays. Be sure to check out my ...

Find my Newest IELTS Post Here – Updated Daily!

by Dave | IELTS FAQ | 18 Comments

IELTS Cambridge 16 Essay: Advertising New Products

by Dave | Cambridge 16 | 9 Comments

This is an IELTS writing task 2 sample answer essay from the newly released Cambridge 16 on the topic of businesses nowadays emphasising that their products ...

IELTS Cambridge 16 Essay: Driverless Vehicles

by Dave | Cambridge 16 | 14 Comments

This is an IELTS writing task 2 sample answer essay on the topic of driverless vehicles, cars, buses and trucks from Cambridge IELTS 16. ...

IELTS Cambridge 16 Essay: Airport Map

by Dave | IELTS Cambridge 16 | 3 Comments

This is an IELTS writing task 1 sample answer essay on the topic of an airport map's redevelopment in the next year from IELTS Cambridge 16. ...

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Many feel that having mixed-gender educational institutions might bring immense benefits for students, while others maintain that single-sex schools are superior. Although gender segregation may enable students to concentrate better on their studies, I am strongly convinced that the advantages derived from allowing students of both sexes to study together are more significant. The argument in favor of gender segregation in schools pertains to students paying more attention to their studies. This is because students, most especially those who have already reached puberty, may be distracted from their studies when mingling with their peers of different genders. In other words, students, particularly males, might be aroused a premature interest in the opposite sex, which possibly diverts their attention from studying. This, in turn, is likely to hurt their academic performance. Therefore, to ensure students focusing on their studies, gender separation is necessary. Nonetheless, I claim that there are more advantages to having co-educational schools. The truth is that schools are places for students to learn not only academically but also socially. This means that the interaction between students of different sexes may facilitate improvements in their social skills. Having single-gender schools, on the other hand, may deprive students of chances to integrate socially with those of the opposite sex. This potentially leads to them struggling to communicate with others, possibly restricting themselves to interacting solely with their rigid gender groups. Consequently, they are likely to have a narrow social networking circle, which is likely to hurt their sense of happiness. In conclusion, although the advantages of having single-sex schools related to students’ focus on studying are undeniable, I hold that the integration of genders may be of greater benefits for students’ social skills.  

Exclusive Ebooks, PDFs and more from me!

Sign up for patreon.

Don't miss out!

"The highest quality materials anywhere on the internet! Dave improved my writing and vocabulary so much. Really affordable options you don't want to miss out on!"

Minh, Vietnam

Hi, I’m Dave! Welcome to my IELTS exclusive resources! Before you commit I want to explain very clearly why there’s no one better to help you learn about IELTS and improve your English at the same time... Read more

Patreon Exclusive Ebooks Available Now!

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Students from single-sex schools are more gender-salient and more anxious in mixed-gender situations: Results from high school and college samples

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected] (WIW); [email protected] (SYS)

Affiliation Department of Psychology, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing

• Wang Ivy Wong, 
• Sylvia Yun Shi, 
• Zhansheng Chen

• Published: December 7, 2018
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707
• Reader Comments

Gender segregation exists in all walks of life. One of the most common forms of institutionalized gender segregation is perhaps single-sex schooling. Because schooling experience has important influence on students’ psychosocial development, interest in gender-segregated education has been reviving over the globe. Skeptics of single-sex schooling have suggested that such schooling may increase students’ gender salience (awareness of gender in categorizations), reduce opportunities for mixed-gender interactions, and increase mixed-gender anxiety, but little evidence has been found. It is critical to explore how single-sex schooling is associated with these psychosocial outcomes in adolescents and young adults because they are in the developmental stage when the desire and need to establish mixed-gender relationships increase. We report two systematic studies on gender salience, mixed-gender friendships, and mixed-gender anxiety on 2059 high school students and 456 college students from single-sex or coeducational schools. Even with demographic background controlled, results suggested higher gender salience in single-sex school students in the high school sample, and greater mixed-gender anxiety and fewer mixed-gender friendships in these students in both samples. These differences were not moderated by student gender and were similar in first-year versus senior college students. Moreover, mixed-gender friendships, though not gender salience, appeared to engage in a possibly bi-directional mediation relationship with mixed-gender anxiety that is consistent with a vicious cycle of escalating anxiety and lack of mixed-gender interaction among single-sex school students. These findings help fill the knowledge gap about the correlates of gender-segregated schooling and shed light on the precursors of later social and achievement differences between single-sex and coeducational school students.

Citation: Wong WI, Shi SY, Chen Z (2018) Students from single-sex schools are more gender-salient and more anxious in mixed-gender situations: Results from high school and college samples. PLoS ONE 13(12): e0208707. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707

Editor: Mollie A. Ruben, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, UNITED STATES

Received: April 16, 2018; Accepted: November 22, 2018; Published: December 7, 2018

Copyright: © 2018 Wong et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: This work was supported by the University of Hong Kong Seed Funding for Basic Research (Project code: 201511159157), http://www.rss.hku.hk/ . The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Gender segregation exists in all walks of life and begins as early as toddlerhood [ 1 ]. The most prevalent form of institutionalized gender segregation currently is perhaps single-sex schooling, a subject of intense research and educational focus around the globe. Along with the revival of single-sex education in the United States following the 2006 reinterpretation of Title IX of the U.S. Education Amendments, researchers continue to question the alleged academic and social benefits of single-sex schooling (for reviews, see [ 2 – 4 ]). A similar revival is seen in mainland China, where all-boys programs are being championed in an attempt to restore masculinity and academic competence in boys [ 5 , 6 ]. Since schooling experience plays an important role in students’ psychosocial development (e.g., see [ 7 ] for differences in sexual orientation and dating experience between single-sex and coeducational school graduates), such trends present a pressing need for comprehensive, evidence-based evaluations of the outcomes of single-sex schooling. As the most prominent difference between single-sex and coeducational schooling is the presence or absence of other-gender peers, the questions of whether single-sex schooling experience is related to students’ attentiveness to gender (gender salience) and anxiety in mixed-gender interactions have been asked by many (e.g., [ 2 , 8 – 12 ]). For example, does gender loom larger in single-sex school students? Are single-sex school students more anxious than coeducational school students when they interact with other-gender peers? If so, is such increased anxiety related to increased salience of gender or simply to reduced mixed-gender experience?

Addressing these questions is important because mixed-gender encounters are inevitable and forming healthy mixed-gender relationships is an important developmental task. Existing studies focus heavily on achievement-related outcomes and show that single-sex and coeducational school students differ minimally on this aspect once confounds such as socioeconomic status are accounted for [ 4 , 13 ]. However, they provide surprisingly little knowledge about the salience of gender, mixed-gender friendships or mixed-gender anxiety. Thus, we tested current students and graduates of single-sex schools and coeducational schools on these outcomes. The research took place in Hong Kong, where single-sex schools were common during the British colonial era in the 1900s and still represent a sizeable portion in the education system today (e.g., approximately 16% of high schools) [ 14 , 15 ]. Here we use “gender” to refer to students’ gender, gender salience, mixed-gender anxiety, and other gender-related concepts. The term “sex” is used only when we refer to sexual orientation and single-sex schooling to follow what is much more common in the usage of these terms.

Gender salience and single-sex schooling

Gender salience refers to the awareness of gender as a categorizing dimension [ 16 ] and it is important because school-aged children, preschoolers, and even infants readily use gender to process incoming information [ 17 – 21 ]. High gender salience has consequences to individuals’ psychosocial development. For example, it leads to the development of gender-role concepts and stereotypes [ 16 , 22 ]. When teachers created gender-salient environments in a two-week experiment, students adopted more gender stereotypes, interacted less with other-gender peers and viewed them less positively [ 23 ].

There is much debate over whether single-sex schools (e.g., [ 2 , 4 ]) or coeducational schools (e.g., [ 24 ]) produce greater gender salience. According to the developmental intergroup theory, gender as an identity becomes salient (cognitively accessible and relevant) under four environmental conditions—when groups are perceptually discriminable, when people are in the minority, when groups are explicitly labeled, and when groups are implicitly used [ 16 ]. This well-validated theory is often used to predict gender salience in single-sex schools. However, because single-sex schools have features that both increase and decrease gender salience, the predictions have been mixed. Most researchers hypothesize that, owing to some conditions of single-sex schools (e.g., gender labels in school names), single-sex school students are more gender-salient [ 2 – 4 ]. Others (e.g., [ 24 ]), emphasizing other conditions of single-sex schools (e.g., own gender being in the majority), predict the opposite. Both sides of the debate cite research on how people perform in same- vs. mixed-gender settings as supporting evidence [ 2 , 24 ], but such research did not directly assess gender salience in single-sex and coeducational school students.

Some studies on single-sex schooling focused on other aspects of gender cognition and their findings are mixed. For example, compared to girls in coeducational schools, Drury, Bukowski, Velásquez, and Stella-Lopez [ 25 ] found girls in single-sex schools to feel more gender-typical and pressured to conform to gender norms, but Kessels and Hannover [ 26 ] found girls in single-sex classes to have less accessible gender-related self-knowledge (lower endorsement of feminine traits and longer reaction time responding to these traits), a finding taken to reflect lower gender salience in single-sex classes. These findings are valuable in understanding how single-sex schooling relates to gender identity and stereotyping, but may not directly translate to gender salience as defined by the developmental intergroup theory [ 16 ] because the constructs are conceptually distinct [ 27 , 28 ]. Nevertheless, these findings point out that empirically measuring gender salience in single-sex and coeducational school students is necessary for us to directly evaluate the debate regarding which school environment highlights gender to the greater extent.

Mixed-gender friendships, mixed-gender anxiety and single-sex schooling

Another concern regarding gender-segregated schooling experience is the potential impact on students’ mixed-gender interactions and friendships. Some school principals cited a lack of real-world comparability as a disadvantage of single-sex schooling, worrying that single-sex school students would struggle in forming mixed-gender relationships [ 9 ]. Indeed, mixed-gender interactions serve key functions in adolescents’ and young adults’ psychosocial development that are unique from same-gender interactions [ 29 ], such as providing opportunities to learn about distinct behavioral norms of the other gender, practice interpersonal skills required to communicate effectively and comfortably with the other gender in the family and workplace, and for heterosexual individuals, acquaint potential romantic partners [ 2 , 8 , 10 , 30 ], as well as preparing them to establish and maintain satisfactory mixed-gender relationships [ 29 , 31 ]. Forming positive mixed-gender friendships benefits emotional well-being, such as by diversifying social support groups and increasing self-esteem [ 29 , 32 ]. The quality of mixed-gender interaction is an especially important developmental task during adolescence because the time spent and the motivation to interact with other-gender peers start to increase during this period [ 1 , 33 ].

Reduced exposure to mixed-gender interactions was suggested to predispose individuals to experience mixed-gender anxiety [ 34 , 35 ], which may lead to future avoidance of mixed-gender situations, thus disrupting the process of social skills acquisition and relationship formation, resulting in a vicious cycle [ 29 ]. Interest in mixed-gender anxiety, sometimes termed “dating anxiety” or more generally “heterosocial anxiety”, has resurged recently [ 36 ]. It was found that higher mixed-gender anxiety is related to less initiatives, satisfaction and poorer performance in mixed-gender interactions [ 34 , 37 ], as well as delayed first dating relationship, fewer dating and sexual experiences, and more difficulties in romantic relationships for heterosexual individuals [ 31 , 32 ]. Besides, mixed-gender anxiety negatively affects psychological and physical well-being, including lower self-esteem and non-assertiveness and increased depression and loneliness [ 38 – 40 ]. However, it is important to note that not all individuals are heterosexual and mixed-gender anxiety may affect both romantic and non-romantic situations. While mixed-gender anxiety in romantic situations (referred to as dating anxiety in this study) is more relevant to heterosexual individuals, the more general form of mixed-gender anxiety in non-romantic situations (referred to as general mixed-gender anxiety) may affect individuals of any sexual orientation. Therefore, it would be meaningful to not only study dating anxiety, but also the general mixed-gender anxiety in non-romantic situations.

There is only a dearth of research on the interpersonal outcomes of single-sex schooling and they [ 4 , 13 ] rarely focused on mixed-gender relationships, the type of interpersonal outcomes most likely to be affected by gender segregation. A few pieces of evidence suggest that mixed-gender relationships could be negatively affected by gender segregation (but see null result in likelihood of remaining married to the first spouse [ 41 ]). For example, two studies controlling for socioeconomic background, parental education and/or religion found that, in early to middle adulthood, single-sex school graduates reported less satisfactory marriage outcomes (e.g., less happy marriage, higher rate of divorce) than coeducational school graduates [ 11 , 42 ]. One study found that 10 th grade students from single-sex schools reported lower satisfaction with other-gender friends than students from coeducational schools [ 43 ].

While the above findings are useful, the number of studies is small and the research is limited in different ways, such as assessing only restricted aspects of interpersonal outcomes (e.g., marriage outcomes) based on single-item retrospective reports [ 11 , 41 , 42 ], and failure to control for any demographic variable of single-sex and coeducational school students [ 43 ]. While a few studies touched upon other aspects of mixed-gender relationships (e.g., heterosocial adjustment) and suggested poorer outcomes associated with single-sex schooling, they are usually unpublished (e.g., [ 44 ]), dated (e.g., [ 44 , 45 ]), or uncontrolled (e.g., [ 44 ]).

Possible pathways of differences

While the majority of the studies on single-sex schooling focus on identifying and describing the differences between single-sex and coeducational school students, few have tested the pathways that lead to these differences. However, some have implicated that single-sex and coeducational school students differ in various domains such as gender stereotyping and subject preferences due to the presumably higher gender salience in single-sex school students (e.g., [ 2 , 4 ]), implying a mediational pathway. As the awareness of oneself being of a different gender appears to trigger an individual’s concerns about gender issues during interactions [ 16 , 46 ] and individual’s higher salience of a social category is correlated with anxious intergroup contact [ 47 ], gender salience may mediate between school type and mixed-gender anxiety. Another pathway that may explain school differences in mixed-gender anxiety may be mixed-gender friendships. In particular, reduced mixed-gender friendships is correlated with greater mixed-gender anxiety [ 34 , 35 ] and single-sex schools perceivably provide few opportunities for mixed-gender friendships, so mixed-gender friendships may mediate between school type and mixed-gender anxiety.

This study aims to address the research gap in the single-sex schooling debate by directly measuring and comparing gender salience, mixed-gender friendships and mixed-gender anxiety in single-sex and coeducational school students in two samples in Hong Kong, one at high school (i.e., 2059 current single-sex and coeducational high school students) and the other at college (i.e., 456 single-sex and coeducational school graduates currently studying in a coeducational college). We also aimed to contribute to the literature by better controlling for confounding variables. Most prior studies comparing single-sex and coeducational school students included no controls, and those that did usually only included family socioeconomic status and, for studies on academic performance, sometimes the students’ preexisting ability [ 3 , 4 ]. Controlling for confounds like these diminished the school differences in academic achievement [ 4 , 48 ]. Although these confounds may be less of an issue when the dependent variables (such as the current variables on mixed-gender anxiety and gender salience) are not closely related to factors affecting school choice (such as academic performance), we followed the advice of controlling for some potentially confounding background differences between single-sex and coeducational school students [ 3 , 4 , 8 , 48 ]. In Hong Kong, around 16% of high schools are single-sex and all colleges are coeducational. Single-sex classes in coeducational schools are extremely rare. The academic quality of high schools is indicated by three bands, with Band 1 being the highest and Band 3 being the lowest. As in most regions, the allocation of students into schools is not random. We controlled for parental income and education, as socioeconomic status is one of the most important control variables in single-sex schooling research [ 8 ]. We additionally controlled for school banding and the numbers of brothers and sisters to rule out potential differences due to the academic quality of schools and gender composition at home [ 33 , 49 ]. For the college sample, we also controlled for sexual orientation and whether the students were studying in a male-dominated, female-dominated, or gender-balanced faculty.

Finally, we explored whether the potential school difference in mixed-gender anxiety was mediated by gender salience and by mixed-gender friendships. Acknowledging the limitations of cross-sectional meditational models to causal inferences [ 50 ], the mediation analyses should be regarded as descriptive and exploratory, and were supplemented with additional analysis testing alternative mediation models.

We predicted that, compared to coeducational school students, single-sex school students would have higher gender salience (H 1 ), fewer other-gender friends (H 2 ), and higher anxiety in mixed-gender situations (H 3 ). Prior studies have not found any consistent moderating effect of student gender on the differences related to single-sex schooling, and we expected the school differences to be similar in boys and girls (H 4 ). Nevertheless, we included student gender as a potential moderator as most prior studies did [ 4 , 13 ]. Across the two samples, we predicted that differences between single-sex and coeducational school students may be more pronounced in the high school sample as the school differences may attenuate when all students were exposed to similar mixed-gender environments after graduation (H 5 ). Also, we hypothesized that the potential school difference in mixed-gender anxiety was mediated by gender salience (H 6 ) and mixed-gender friendships (H 7 ).

Study 1: High school sample

Participants..

Participants were recruited from four local high schools (one all-girls, one all-boys and two coeducational) located in demographically diverse districts in Hong Kong. Participants included Form 1 to 6 (7 th to 12 th grade) students except for the all-girls school, from which Form 6 students were excluded due to the school’s arrangement for public exam preparation. Questionnaires were administered by a class teacher in each class. Participants completed measures on the dependent variables and reported their monthly family income, parental education and age, numbers of sisters and brothers, and ethnicity. This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations and approval of the University of Hong Kong Human Research Ethics Committee (HKU HREC). Students’ assent and passive consent from parents or guardians were obtained before data collection. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

A total of 2083 students participated in the study (participation rate: 84%). Twenty-four subjects were excluded from analyses due to missing or extreme data (11 coeducational school students did not indicate their gender and 13 students reported extremely unlikely values on demographic variables). The final sample ( N = 2059, M age = 15.78 years, SD = 2.03) consisted of 589 boys and 376 girls from the two coeducational schools, 416 boys from the all-boys school, and 678 girls from the all-girls school. This sample size had over 99% a priori power to detect small differences (.20 < d < .30) at α = .05, two-tailed [ 51 ]. Participants were mainly Chinese (89%). Among the four participating schools, the all-boys school and one coeducational school were in Band 2, while the all-girls school and the other coeducational school were in Band 3. All participating schools used Chinese as the teaching language. Some schools used spoken Cantonese and some used spoken Mandarin in class, but they used the same written language in formal printed materials. Therefore, the questionnaires were printed in Chinese. Consistent with prior research [ 3 , 4 , 8 ], participants from single-sex schools had parents with higher education level, t (2042) = -7.157, p < .001, and attended more academically excellent schools, t (2023) = -10.855, p < .001, unequal variances, than did participants from coeducational schools. The average parental education level of the sample (i.e., between junior secondary to senior secondary) was similar to a representative sample of over 9000 students from local high schools, one from each of the 19 districts in Hong Kong [ 52 ]. Detailed participant characteristics are presented in Table 1 .

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t001

Gender salience measure.

Gender salience was measured by McGuire et al.’s method [ 53 ]. This measure has been shown to be associated with or affected by gender composition [ 27 , 53 ]. Participants were asked to give three short responses to each of these two questions: “Tell me what you are” and “Tell me what you are not”. They were instructed to write down whatever they could think of immediately. The responses were then coded as “gender-related” or “non-gender-related”. Table 2 shows examples of this coding scheme. Answers were first coded separately by two coders. Inter-rater reliability was high for all answers (all κ > .93). Disagreements were then resolved by discussions between the two coders. The total number of gender-related answers across the two questions was summed to indicate gender salience.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t002

Percentages of other-gender friends and close friends measure.

To provide an indicator of mixed-gender friendships, participants reported the percentage of their same-gender friends and the percentage of their same-gender close friends. Clear definitions were given to the participants to differentiate “friend” and “close friend” (i.e., “friend” referred to “someone whom you know the name and go out on activities in group but not alone”; “close friend” referred to “someone whom you know the name, go out on activities in group or alone and share your emotional feeling with, and he/she also shares his/her emotional feelings with you, and provides honest feedback to you”). The responses were reverse-coded to indicate the percentages of other-gender friends and close friends.

Mixed-gender anxiety measure.

The Dating Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (DAS-A) [ 31 ] was modified to measure mixed-gender anxiety. The original 21-item scale was designed to measure distress and concerns about negative evaluation in dating as well as non-dating mixed-gender situations. The first author reviewed the items with a group of university students. No item was deemed culturally inappropriate. We were interested in both dating anxiety and general mixed-gender anxiety, but because many high school participants were unlikely to have had dating experience, 10 items involving actual dating scenarios were excluded, resulting in a total of 11 test items, of which 3 items measured Fear of Negative Evaluation (e.g., “I worry that I may not be attractive to people of the opposite sex”), 4 items measured Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship (e.g., “I become tense and jittery when I feel that someone of the opposite-sex is checking me out”), and 4 items measured Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups (e.g., “It takes me a long time to feel comfortable when I am in a group of both males and females.”). Three filler items (e.g., “I love to go to parties”) were included to provide a break from rating anxiety-related items. Responses were made on a five-point scale (ranging from 1 “completely disagree” to 5 “strongly agree”). Following Glickman and La Greca [ 31 ], scores were summed for each sub-scale. The internal reliability was good for total DAS-A ( α = .913), Fear of Negative Evaluation ( α = .797), Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship ( α = .853), and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups ( α = .824).

A series of 2 (school type: single-sex vs. coeducational) × 2 (student gender: male vs. female) ANCOVAs were conducted on gender salience, percentage of other-gender friends, percentage of other-gender close friends, total mixed-gender anxiety, and the three anxiety subscales (see Table 3 ). All the outcome variables in this study had skewness (ranging from .294 to 1.051) and kurtosis (ranging from .004 to .864) that were within acceptable ranges [ 54 ]. The estimated marginal means and standard errors of the outcome variables are shown in Table 4 (correlations among the study variables are presented in Table A in S1 File ). The ANOVA results without covariates can be found in Table B in S1 File . Since results without control variables are considered less reliable, we will focus on the ANCOVA results. Mediation analyses were then conducted to explore whether school differences in mixed-gender anxiety were mediated by mixed-gender friendships and/or gender salience. All analyses controlled for family income, parental age, parental education, student age, number of brothers, number of sisters, and school banding.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t004

Gender salience.

Single-sex school students gave more gender-related answers to the questions “tell me what you are” and “tell me what you are not” than coeducational school students, p < .001, d = .24, meaning that single-sex school students were more gender-salient than coeducational school students, supporting H 1 . There was also a main effect of student gender, with female students being more gender-salient than male students, p < .001, d = .16. Supporting H 4, no interaction effect with student gender was found.

Percentages of other-gender friends and close friends.

Consistent with H 2 , coeducational school students reported having higher percentages of other-gender friends ( p < .001, d = .53) and other-gender close friends ( p < .001, d = .26) than single-sex school students. Also, female students reported a higher percentage of other-gender friends than male students ( p = .012, d = .11). There was no main effect of student gender in the percentage of other-gender close friends. Supporting H 4, there was no interaction effect with student gender.

Mixed-gender anxiety.

Consistent with H 3 , compared to coeducational school students, single-sex school students reported higher levels of total mixed-gender anxiety, p = .001, d = .15, Fear of Negative Evaluation, p = .004, d = .13, Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship, p = .012, d = .11, and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups, p < .001, d = .16, even when students’ demographic characteristics were controlled for. There were also main effects of student gender, with male students reporting more total mixed-gender anxiety, p = .001, d = .15, more Fear of Negative Evaluation, p < .001, d = .20, and more Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship, p = .005, d = .13, than female students. Supporting H 4, there was no interaction effect with student gender.

Mediations.

Mediation analyses using 10,000 bootstrap samples were conducted by the SPSS macro PROCESS [ 55 ] to test whether the association between single-gender schooling (X) and students’ mixed-gender anxiety took place through the mediators (M), gender salience and/or mixed-gender friendships. Separate analyses were conducted for the different forms of mixed-gender anxiety as the dependent variable (Y). Monthly family income, parental education, parental age, student age, school banding, number of brothers and number of sisters were entered as covariates. Gender salience and mixed-gender friendships entered the mediation model as two simultaneous mediators (see Fig 1 for the generic mediation model and Table 5 for the results). There were significant indirect effects (i.e., mediation) of percentage of other-gender friends on all forms of mixed-gender anxiety, supporting H 7 . There were also significant indirect effects of percentage of other-gender close friends on all forms of mixed-gender anxiety except for Fear of Negative Evaluation. However, contrary to H 6, gender salience had no significant indirect effects on mixed-gender anxiety.

In the mediation model, a 1 b 1 denotes the indirect effect (i.e., mediation) of gender salience, a 2 b 2 denotes the indirect effect of mixed-gender friendships, and c’ denotes the direct effect of school type on mixed-gender anxiety.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.g001

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t005

To examine whether the direction of mediation effects was reversible, we also tested alternative mediation models (see Figure A in S1 File ), with mixed-gender anxiety as the mediator and mixed-gender friendships as the dependent variable. School type was always set to be the independent variable because it was already fixed before the measurements of mixed-gender anxiety and mixed-gender friendships. Results of the alternative mediation analyses (see Table C in S1 File ) showed that there were significant indirect effects of all forms of mixed-gender anxiety on percentages of other-gender friends and other-gender close friends.

Study 1 showed that adolescent students currently gender-segregated at school scored higher on gender salience, had fewer mixed-gender friendships, and reported higher anxiety in mixed-gender interactions. The higher mixed-gender anxiety related to reduced mixed-gender friendships but not increased gender salience. What remains unknown is whether these findings would also be found in students who have left the gender-segregated school environment. It may be that differences between single-sex and coeducational school students remain but attenuate when all students are exposed to similar mixed-gender environments after graduation. To investigate how single-sex and coeducational school students differ at different stages in life, Study 2 tested gender salience, mixed-gender friendship and mixed-gender anxiety in a college sample.

Study 2: College sample

Four hundred and eighty-three participants were recruited from a large university in Hong Kong through advertisements posted in campus and halls, mass emails through departments and faculties, and snowballing. Testing took place in a laboratory. Participants completed the gender salience measure, the mixed-gender anxiety scale and reported their demographic background. All measures were presented in their original English language as English is the medium of instruction for tertiary education in Hong Kong. This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations and approval of the University of Hong Kong Human Research Ethics Committee (HKU HREC). All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Parental consent was not required by the HKU HREC for this sample.

Participants reported the name, type (single-sex or coeducational) and banding of the high schools they had attended. School banding was averaged if participants had attended more than one high school (only 4.1% of the total sample). Participants also reported their college year, total parental income and parental education, numbers of sisters and brothers, faculty, and sexual orientation. Students’ faculty was coded as male-dominated, female-dominated, or gender-balanced based on enrolment statistics [ 56 ]. Sexual orientation was assessed using the adapted Klein Sexual Orientation Grid (KSOG) [ 57 ]. Participants rated their sexual orientation in the past 12 months on four aspects, namely attraction, behavior, fantasy, and identity, from 0 (other-sex only) to 6 (same-sex only). The number of participants was roughly balanced by school type and student gender. Participants who had switched between single-sex and coeducational schools were excluded from analysis ( n = 27). The final sample consisted of 456 graduates (239 females; 52.4%) who had attended 182 different high schools. These graduates either attended single-sex schools ( n = 207) or coeducational schools ( n = 249) for high school education. This sample size had over 80% a priori power to detect small differences (.26 < d < .30) at α = .05, two-tailed [ 51 ]. The sample was almost exclusively Chinese (97.6%) and aged 19.53 years on average. The mean parental income of the sample (HKD42632) suggested that the sample was demographically similar to undergraduate students from several local universities (e.g., [ 58 – 60 ]).

Table 6 presents detailed participant characteristics by school type and student gender. Consistent with prior research [ 3 , 4 , 8 ], participants from single-sex schools had parents with higher education level, t (454) = 3.48, p = .001, and attended more academically excellent schools, t (387) = 4.26, p < .001, unequal variances, than did participants from coeducational schools.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t006

Gender salience was measured by the same method used in Study 1. The inter-rater reliability was good for all answers ( κ ranging from .87 to .99).

Percentage of other-gender close friends measure.

Percentage of other-gender close friends was measured by the same method used in Study 1. Percentage of other-gender friends was not assessed in the college sample.

As in Study 1, participants reported their mixed-gender anxiety on the modified dating anxiety scale (DAS-A) [ 31 ]. In contrast to Study 1, participants in Study 2 completed the full 21-item version of DAS-A because dating experience was common in the college sample (93.4% of the participants reported some sort of dating experience; see list of dating experience items from the Dating History Questionnaire [ 61 ] in Table D in S1 File ). Those who had never dated before were asked to imagine how they would feel and behave in the described situations. For this full scale, ten items measured Fear of Negative Evaluation, seven items measured Social Distress in Dating Situations, four items measured Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups, and five filler items provided a break from rating anxiety-related items. The internal consistency was good for total DAS-A ( α = .95), Fear of Negative Evaluation ( α = .92), Social Distress in Dating ( α = .89), and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups ( α = .80). Since our focus was not only on dating anxiety and only 2.6% of the college participants reported having no heterosexual attraction at all, we included all participants in the analysis of mixed-gender anxiety and controlled for sexual orientation.

To rule out the effect of anxiety not specific to mixed-gender situations, we additionally controlled for social anxiety in analyses involving mixed-gender anxiety, as did Glickman and La Greca [ 31 ]. Social anxiety was measured by the Social Anxiety Scale for adolescents (SAS-A) [ 62 ] which contained 18 items that reflected general anxiety felt in social situations (e.g., “I feel shy around people I don’t know”). Each item was rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). The total social anxiety score was the sum of all items. Reliability of the SAS-A was high ( α = .93).

A series of 2 (school: single-sex vs. coeducational) × 2 (student gender: male vs. female) ANCOVAs were conducted on gender salience, percentage of other-gender close friends, total mixed-gender anxiety and the three anxiety subscales (see Table 7 ). All the outcome variables had skewness (ranging from .040 to 1.235) and kurtosis (ranging from .488 to .670) that were within acceptable ranges [ 54 ]. The estimated marginal means and standard errors of the outcome variables are shown in Table 8 (correlations among the study variables are presented in Table E in S1 File ). The ANOVA results without covariates can be found in Table F in S1 File . Mediation analyses were conducted to explore whether school differences in mixed-gender anxiety were mediated by mixed-gender friendships and/or gender salience. All analyses controlled for parental income, parental education, number of brothers, number of sisters, school banding, the four dimensions of sexual orientation, faculty, and student age; the analyses on mixed-gender anxiety also controlled for social anxiety.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t007

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t008

In contrast to Study 1, there were no main effects of school type or student gender and no interaction effects on gender salience. Therefore, H 1 was not supported.

Percentage of other-gender close friends.

There was a main effect of school type, with coeducational school students reporting a larger percentage of other-gender close friends than single-sex school students, p < .001, d = .47, supporting H 2 . There was also a main effect of student gender, with male students reporting a larger percentage of other-gender close friends than female students ( p = .005, d = .27). Consistent with H 4 , there was no interaction effect with student gender.

Single-sex school students reported higher levels of total mixed-gender anxiety ( p = .009, d = .25), Social Distress in Dating ( p = .007, d = .26), and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups ( p = .007, d = .26) than coeducational school students. There was no main effect of school in Fear of Negative Evaluation. Therefore, H 3 was largely supported. Male students reported higher levels of total mixed-gender anxiety ( p = .020, d = .22) and Fear of Negative Evaluation ( p = .008, d = .25) than female students. There were no main effects of student gender in Social Distress in Dating and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups. Consistent with H 4 , there were no interaction effects with student gender in all forms of mixed-gender anxiety.

Supplementary analysis: Did school differences depend on college year?

Comparing across the two samples, the differences between single-sex school students and coeducational school students were more pronounced in the high school sample, supporting H 5 . For example, gender salience and fear of negative evaluation differed between single-sex and coeducational school students only in the high school sample.

We further conducted a series of “School type (single-sex vs. coeducational) × Student gender (male vs. female) × College year (first year vs. non-first year)” ANCOVAs on the college sample (see Table G in supplementary materials) to test for potential college year effects. Results showed no main effect of college year or any interaction involving college year.

As in Study 1, mediation analyses were conducted using PROCESS with 10,000 bootstrap samples and the same mediation model, except that for Study 2, the covariates were parental income, parental education, number of brothers, number of sisters, school banding, the four dimensions of sexual orientation, faculty, student age, and social anxiety. Each form of mixed-gender anxiety was analyzed separately (see Table 9 ). Percentage of other-gender close friends mediated the school differences in total mixed-gender anxiety, Social Distress in Dating, and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups, but not Fear of Negative Evaluation. Thus, H 7 was partially supported. As in Study 1, there were no significant indirect effects of gender salience on either total or any particular form of mixed-gender anxiety. Alternative mediation models were also conducted (see Figure A in S1 File for the generic alternative mediation model and Table H for the results). Results showed significant indirect effects of total mixed-gender anxiety, Social Distress in Dating and Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups on the percentage of other-gender close friends.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.t009

Schooling experience represents an important developmental influence. Apart from fostering academic skills, public education should also prepare students for mixed-gender workplaces, families, and citizenry [ 2 ]. Stakeholders of single-sex schooling have therefore been concerned about the impact of gender-segregated schooling on social development, especially the extent to which students can handle mixed-gender situations with ease. However, research on single-sex schooling has focused on academic outcomes and provides little knowledge on its social outcomes. We provide the first systematic comparison of students from single-sex and coeducational schools on gender salience and mixed-gender anxiety in a high school sample and a college sample. Even when demographic characteristics were controlled, our results supported the hypotheses that single-sex school students had higher gender salience (H 1 ) in the high school sample, and that single-sex school students had fewer other-gender friends (H 2 ) and higher mixed-gender anxiety (H 3 ) in both high school and college samples. The hypothesis that such school differences were similar between boys and girls (H 4 ) was also supported. More outcomes were found to differ by school type in the high school sample than in the college sample, providing support for H 5 . Moreover, the association between school type and mixed-gender anxiety was mediated by mixed-gender friendships in both samples (H 7 supported), but not by gender salience (H 6 not supported). These results illuminate the gender cognition and social development of students and have implications for school policies.

Mixed-gender anxiety

Mixed-gender anxiety may affect people’s adjustments in both romantic situations and non-romantic situations. Dating anxiety is more relevant to romantic situations and mainly affects heterosexuals whereas general mixed-gender anxiety is more relevant to non-romantic situations and affects individuals of any sexual orientation. The scale we used to measure mixed-gender anxiety was analyzed in different subscales given specific names to indicate whether the items concerned romantic (i.e., the Social Distress in Dating subscale in the college sample and the Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship in the high school sample) or general non-romantic situations (i.e., the Fear of Negative Evaluation and the Social Distress in Mixed-gender Groups subscales). Participants reported the level of anxiety in various mixed-gender situations such as actual dating (in the college sample), meeting a potential dating partner and casual get-togethers. All groups of participants reported moderate levels of anxiety, reflecting the centrality of mixed-gender relationship that adolescents and young adults attach to themselves [ 1 , 29 , 32 , 33 ]. However, male students reported greater mixed-gender anxiety in the form of Fear of Negative Evaluation (in both samples) and Social Distress in Potential Romantic Relationship (in the high school sample). Prior studies have also found that males reported greater anxiety towards mixed-gender romance and friendships [ 31 , 36 , 63 ]. The direction and size of the gender differences ( d ranging from .13 to .25) were similar to the gender difference in anxiety in mixed-gender groups found in a slightly younger, adolescent sample [ 31 ], suggesting good validity of this scale in the current sample. This gender difference may be related to the greater social expectation for men than women to take initiative and make an impression in mixed-gender interactions [ 36 , 63 ].

More importantly, compared to coeducational school students, current single-sex school students scored higher on all forms of mixed-gender anxiety, and graduates from single-sex schools scored higher on anxiety in dating situations and casual mixed-gender groups, even after controlling for general social anxiety. Results were in line with the evidence of more negative marriage outcomes in middle-aged graduates of single-sex schools [ 11 , 42 ] and one small uncontrolled study that found lower mixed-gender friendship satisfaction in 10 th grade students of single-sex schools [ 43 ]. We further showed that the difference in mixed-gender anxiety was significant even after controlling for demographic characteristics that often cloud comparisons of single-sex and coeducational school students, and that this difference existed above and beyond general social anxiety.

The differences in mixed-gender anxiety between single-sex and coeducational schools ( d s ranging from .11 to .26) were small by statistical convention [ 51 ], but were at least as large as half of the difference found between older and younger students differing by one grade in high school [ 31 ]. Moreover, it is intriguing that the effect of school did not interact with student gender, suggesting that both male and female students from single-sex schools experienced more mixed-gender anxiety.

Because the social outcomes of single-sex school graduates may change after they immerse themselves into a coeducational environment (e.g., [ 64 ]), we conducted supplementary analyses comparing first-year students and senior students to test for potential college year effects. However, it appeared that the differences between single-sex and coeducational school graduates in mixed-gender anxiety and friendships did not change throughout the college years, implying that the school type effects were long lasting.

Potential mechanisms associated with differences between single-sex and coeducational school students

Besides mixed-gender anxiety, mixed-gender friendships and gender salience were compared between school types. They were also tested as potential mediators of the school differences in mixed-gender anxiety. As expected based on the finding that same-gender peer preference remains strong throughout the lifespan [ 1 ], both coeducational and single-sex school students reported that only a minority of their friends, regardless of close friends or not, were of a different gender. In particular, single-sex school students reported having a smaller percentage of other-gender friends than coeducational school students and this tendency appeared to be remarkably stable across the high school and college samples, with coeducational school students and single-sex school students reporting roughly 30% and 20% of their friendships being mixed-gender, respectively.

Consistent with the negative correlation between mixed-gender friendships and mixed-gender anxiety [ 34 , 35 ], mixed-gender friendships mediated the school differences in mixed-gender anxiety in both high school and college samples, suggesting that having fewer other-gender friends may be a possible reason why single-sex school students felt more mixed-gender anxiety. There were significant indirect effects in the alternative mediation models for both samples, meaning that single-sex schooling may also lead to reduced mixed-gender friendships by heightening mixed-gender anxiety. These bi-directional mediations were consistent with the view that mixed-gender anxiety and poor mixed-gender social skills or relationships may escalate in a vicious cycle [ 29 ]. However, magnitudes of the indirect effects in the alternative mediation models (see the absolute values of ab in Tables C and H in S1 File ) were consistently smaller than those in the original mediation models (see Tables 5 and 9 ), suggesting that the mediation effects were stronger in the path from mixed-gender friendships to mixed-gender anxiety than vice versa.

The finding that gender salience was higher in current single-sex school students supported the speculations against single-sex schooling [ 2 , 4 ]. To our knowledge, this is the first empirical evidence showing directly a difference in gender salience between students from single-sex and coeducational schools. This difference, however, was found only in the high school sample, suggesting that any effect of gender-segregated schooling on this variable disappears within a few years upon departure from the gender-segregated environment. This finding did not preclude the possibility that certain characteristics of single-sex schools reduce gender salience (e.g., absence of other-gender peers), as suggested by proponents (e.g., [ 24 ]), but suggested that the characteristics that increase gender salience (e.g., the use of gender as a basis for segregation) may be more powerful. We hypothesized that gender salience would also mediate the school differences in mixed-gender anxiety because the awareness of gender appears to trigger an individual’s concerns about gender-related issues during interactions [ 16 , 46 ]. However, although gender salience showed the expected difference between school types, it was not a mediator of the school differences in mixed-gender anxiety.

Policy implications

Mixed-gender interactions serve key functions in adolescents’ psychosocial development that are unique from same-gender interactions [ 29 ]. Anxiety in mixed-gender situations has negative social [ 29 , 31 , 34 ], psychological and physical effects [ 38 – 40 ]. People high on mixed-gender anxiety tend to avoid mixed-gender situations and be less happy about them, which may result in a disruption of the learning process of establishing functional mixed-gender relationships [ 29 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 37 ] and pose challenges for transition into adulthood. Although students in single-sex schools may not need to face interpersonal problems in mixed-gender situations at school, interactions in mixed-gender groups are inevitable at many points in life. For example, classes are rarely gender-segregated in college and many courses require students to form study groups randomly, where students will have to cooperate with both same- and other-gender peers in order to optimize their learning outcomes. In this case, mixed-gender anxiety may become an obstacle to getting better academic results. Moreover, mixed-gender anxiety may reduce students’ interest and motivation in pursuing their future study and/or career in the areas that are dominated by the other gender. When female students avoid science and engineering classes or when male students avoid nursing classes, the number of women in science and engineering jobs and the number of men in nursing jobs may be diminished, in turn exacerbating the problems when one gender is underrepresented in fields, such as inequity in earnings and stifled talent. Besides, as students are likely to meet their future partner during adolescence and early adulthood, mixed-gender anxiety may diminish the chance of building successful romantic relationships for heterosexual individuals.

Reduced exposure to mixed-gender interactions has been suggested to predispose adolescents to experience mixed-gender anxiety [ 34 , 35 ]. Consistent with this notion, we found students of single-sex schools reported having fewer other-gender friends in both high school and college samples. Also, single-sex school students reported higher levels of three different types of mixed-gender anxiety, two of which remained higher than coeducational school students even after leaving the gender-segregated environment. The effects were small. However, they were found in both male and female students, and remained in the college years. Moreover, the school type differences were mediated by mixed-gender friendships. These findings substantiated the concerns that the reduced opportunities for single-sex school students to engage in mixed-gender interactions may negatively affect their ability to deal with the other gender [ 2 , 8 , 10 ] and to adapt to society [ 9 ]. They suggested potential benefits for single-sex schools to increase mixed-gender activities early on in order to compensate for the inherently limited opportunities for mixed-gender interactions. Besides, for both male and female students, teaching more androgynous gender roles may be beneficial because higher masculinity has been found to correlate with higher discomfort with mixed-gender situations whereas androgynous men were more comfortable and confident than either masculine or undifferentiated men in these situations [ 63 , 65 ].

We did not find gender salience to be related to mixed-gender anxiety. This may imply that interventions for reducing mixed-gender anxiety should focus more on mixed-gender friendships instead of gender salience. However, it may be that gender salience mediates mixed-gender anxiety under specific circumstances, such as when coupled with low perceived competence in mixed-gender interactions. This finding also did not preclude the possibility for higher gender salience in single-sex school students to translate into greater gender-stereotyping, as predicted by the developmental intergroup theory [ 16 ]. However, currently it is difficult to make this conclusion because findings on how single-sex or coeducational school students differ on various aspects of gender-stereotyping and gender cognitions are mixed (cf. [ 25 , 26 ]; see meta-analysis by Pahlke et al. [ 4 ]). Nevertheless, the finding of higher gender salience in current students from single-sex schools itself may call for attention, as people with higher gender salience develop more rigid gender stereotypes and negativity towards the other gender [ 16 , 22 , 23 ].

Limitations

As in many studies of single-sex schooling, random assignment was not possible, therefore there was no certainty that the observed differences between students from single-sex schools and coeducational schools were caused by gender segregation. Also, it would be impossible to control for all potentially confounding variables. However, by controlling for a multitude of key demographic variables, this study would be classified as one of the highly controlled studies on single-sex schooling [ 4 ]. Moreover, parents’ choice of schools is affected by a host of factors that are rarely gender-related [ 66 ], and the eventual school allocation involves a complex interplay between personal preference, academic ability, and procedural and logistical systems. It is thus questionable that students were self-selected into single-sex or coeducational schools based on pre-existing levels of the current outcomes (gender salience, mixed-gender friendships, and mixed-gender anxiety). Studies of parents’ and children’s reasons for choosing certain schools and a longitudinal study measuring the outcome variables prior to streaming into single-sex or coeducational schools will be helpful.

Mixed-gender anxiety and mixed-gender friendships were not measured at different time points, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the differences in mixed-gender friendship were mediated by mixed-gender anxiety. MacKinnon et al. [ 50 ] suggested regarding cross-sectional mediation as descriptive information because alternative causal explanations are possible. In consideration of this possibility, we also tested the alternative mediation models and the results suggested reciprocal influences between mixed-gender anxiety and mixed-gender friendships. While policy and ethical restrictions may make it difficult to use experimental paradigms to validate mediation relations such as those we hypothesized, qualitative studies may help to achieve this goal [ 50 ]. Regardless of causality, the descriptive differences in gender salience, mixed-gender anxiety, and mixed-gender friendships found between single-sex and coeducational school students and between high school and college students provide valuable data that inform an intense debate and intervention strategies.

The two samples each had limitations and strengths. Like many prior studies, the high school sample was limited by the inclusion of a few schools [ 67 ], but its sample size was large. The college sample was limited in the sense that it included high school graduates currently studying at a large university, and so may be more academically competent and of higher socioeconomic status than the general body of high school graduates. However, the generalizability of the college sample was increased by its inclusion of graduates from many different high schools. There was some evidence that the two samples were at least demographically similar to students from other high schools and universities in the same region (e.g., [ 52 , 58 – 60 , 68 ]). Besides, homogeneity of the sample may have the benefit of increasing control over sample characteristics [ 67 , 69 ]. Both samples were also relatively large compared to those in other single-sex schooling research on social outcomes, for which data cannot be provided by existing large-scale data sets (see studies included in [ 4 ]). Most importantly, the convergent evidence from the two samples, each with its own strengths and limitations, added to the reliability of the findings.

Results showed differences between students from single-sex and coeducational schools at both high school and college, suggesting that prior gender segregation had lasting effects on social outcomes. However, we were not able to show within-person changes. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate these changes. Moreover, part of the study was based on self-reported mixed-gender anxiety. Well-controlled experimental or observational paradigms may be needed to better capture participants' experienced anxiety.

Transgender individuals may not fit into the current research on mixed-gender interaction and our study did not cover the dating anxiety of nonheterosexual individuals. Future studies could extend the scope of research to include more genders and sexual orientations and explore the type of anxiety which may be more relevant to transgender and nonheterosexual individuals.

Conclusions

In response to stakeholders’ concerns about gender salience, mixed-gender relationships and mixed-gender anxiety of students deprived of mixed-gender experience at school [ 2 , 8 – 12 ], we found differences in gender salience, mixed-gender friendships and mixed-gender anxiety during high school and into the college years that favored coeducational schooling. High school students of single-sex schools were more gender salient, more anxious about mixed-gender situations and had fewer other-gender friends, and graduates of single-sex schools were still more anxious about mixed-gender interactions and had fewer other-gender friends. These early differences may have important implications for later marriage [ 11 , 42 ], academic, and career outcomes.

Results showed that single-sex schooling was associated with psychosocial outcomes both during and after the gender-segregated experience. Although stakeholders have focused on the short-term consequences of single-sex schooling [ 9 ], it will be important for policy makers to also consider its long-term consequences on students’ psychosocial development. The alleged academic benefits of single-sex schooling have recently been concluded as trivial or nonsignificant in several reviews and meta-analyses (e.g., [ 2 – 4 ]). It is timely for researchers to put more focus on evaluating the social consequences of single-sex schooling.

Supporting information

S1 file. supplementary tables and figures..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208707.s001

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 8. Bigler RS, Hayes AR, Liben LS. Analysis and evaluation of the rationales for single-sex schooling. In: Liben LS, Bigler RS, editors. Advances in child development and behavior: The role of gender in educational contexts and outcomes. London, UK: Academic Press; 2014. pp. 225–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2014.05.002
• 10. Hanish LD, Fabes RA. Peer socialization of gender in young boys and girls. In: Tremblay RE, Boivin M, Peters RDeV, editors. Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development. Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development; 2014. pp. 1–4. Available from: http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/textes-experts/en/2492/peer-socialization-of-gender-in-young-boys-and-girls.pdf
• 15. Ho WY. Schooling boys and girls: The development of single-sex and co-educational schools in Hong Kong. M.Phil. Thesis, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. 2004. Available from: http://repository.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/en/item/cuhk-324554
• 16. Bigler RS, Liben LS. A developmental intergroup theory of social stereotypes and prejudice. In: Liben LS, Bigler RS, editors. Advances in child development and behavior: The role of gender in educational contexts and outcomes. London, UK: Academic Press; 2006. pp. 39–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2407(06)80004-2
• 30. Hansen DJ, Christopher JS, Nangle DW. Adolescent heterosocial interactions and dating. In: Van Hasselt VB, Hersen M, editors. Handbook of social development: A lifespan perspective. New York, NY: Plenum Press; 1992. pp. 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0694-6_15
• 37. Connolly J, Goldberg A. Romantic relationships in adolescence: The role of friends and peers in the emergence and development. In: Furman W, Brown BB, Feiring C, editors. The development of romantic relationships in adolescence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999. pp. 266–290.
• 41. Riordan CH. Girls and boys in school: Together or separate? New York, NY: Teachers College Press; 1990.
• 44. Kark M. The influence of co-education and single-sex education on adolescent development. M.A. Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. 1983. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/39676092.pdf
• 51. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
• 54. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2011.
• 55. Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2013.
• 56. Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Women and men in Hong Kong: Key statistics. 2015. Available from: https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/fd.jsp?file=B11303032015AN15B0100.pdf&product_id=B1130303&lang=1
• 57. Klein F. The bisexual option. New York, NY: Haworth Press; 1993.
• 58. Hong Kong Polytechnic University. A profile of new student: 2015. Hong Kong: Centre STARS (Student Advancement and Resources), Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2016.
• 59. Wong S. A profile of new full-time undergraduate students 2015/16. Hong Kong: Centre of Development and Resources for Students, The University of Hong Kong; 2007.
• 60. Yuen P. A profile of undergraduate students 2015. Hong Kong: Student Affairs Office, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; [date unknown].
• 68. Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Thematic report: Household income distribution in Hong Kong. 2017. Available from: http://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11200962016XXXXB0100.pdf

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

IELTS Advantage

IELTS Preparation Courses

Discuss Both Views Sample Essay- Mixed Schools

How to write an IELTS discussion essay:

• Plan your answer.
• State what your essay will discuss in your introduction.
• List the advantages and disadvantages in the next two paragraphs.
• Summarise both in your conclusion, and offer an opinion.
• Read this sample essay for an example.

Some people think that it is better to educate boys and girls in separate schools. Others, however, believe that boys and girls benefit more from attending mixed schools.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

It is often argued that school children should go to single sex schools, while other would say that males and females get the most out of integrated schools. This essay will argue that despite there being some social benefits to females and males going to the same school, the academic advantages of educating them separately make it more worthwhile.

Many feel that mixing both sexes at school helps to develop social skills and makes people less awkward around the opposite sex later in life. This is especially true for males, who often find it difficult to approach and talk to women socially if they don’t get used to it first in the classroom. For example, the Sunday Times recently reported that men who did not have regular social contact with girls when they were growing up are 68% more likely to suffer from anxiety when in the company of females.

Despite the argument above, it is difficult to argue with the fact that single-sex schools consistently top examination league tables. In nearly every area of the United Kingdom, the top schools only allow boys or girls to attend and this may lead to higher grades because students can focus exclusively on their studies. Personally, I went to a school for both boys and girls and found that I had to deal with many more distractions compared to friends who attended the local boys-only college.

In conclusion, integrating the sexes can prevent social awkwardness later in life and make pupils more sociable in the company of other genders, but a school’s primary purpose is to educate and those with just one sex or the other outperform those that allow both.

Want more sample essays? Check out our IELTS Task 2 page. 

About Christopher Pell

My name is Christopher Pell and I'm the Managing Director of IELTS Advantage.

I started IELTS Advantage as a simple blog to help 16 students in my class. Several years later, I am very humbled that my VIP Course has been able to help thousands of people around the world to score a Band 7+ in their IELTS tests.

If you need my help with your IELTS preparation, you can send me an email using the contact us page.

Some people think that single-sex schools are better than mixed schools. Others believe that mixed-sex schools are the only way for children to learn. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Fully explain your ideas

To get an excellent score in the IELTS Task 2 writing section, one of the easiest and most effective tips is structuring your writing in the most solid format. A great argument essay structure may be divided to four paragraphs, in which comprises of four sentences (excluding the conclusion paragraph, which comprises of three sentences).

For we to consider an essay structure a great one, it should be looking like this:

• Paragraph 1 - Introduction
• Sentence 1 - Background statement
• Sentence 2 - Detailed background statement
• Sentence 3 - Thesis
• Sentence 4 - Outline sentence
• Paragraph 2 - First supporting paragraph
• Sentence 1 - Topic sentence
• Sentence 2 - Example
• Sentence 3 - Discussion
• Sentence 4 - Conclusion
• Paragraph 3 - Second supporting paragraph
• Paragraph 4 - Conclusion
• Sentence 1 - Summary
• Sentence 2 - Restatement of thesis
• Sentence 3 - Prediction or recommendation

Our recommended essay structure above comprises of fifteen (15) sentences, which will make your essay approximately 250 to 275 words.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ » — a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

• Check your IELTS essay »
• Find essays with the same topic
• View collections of IELTS Writing Samples
• Show IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics

Big salary is much more important than job satisfaction. Do you agree or disagree?

An increasing number of schools provide tablets and laptop computers for students to use in school, replacing books and other printed materials like exams and assignments. what are the advantages and disadvantages of this trend, some countries achieve international sports by building specialised facilities to train top athletes, instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. do you think this is positive or negative development discuss both views and give your opinion., people are staying more and more at home, these days. what are the causes and effects., childhood obesity is being a serious problem in many countries. what are the causes of this what solutions can be offered.