You'll occasionally hear people claim that single-sex education is "good for girls, but not for boys." Graham Able, of Dulwich College (in London, England) studied the performance of girls and boys in 30 single-sex and coeducational schools in England. He found that while both girls and boys did better in single-sex schools than they did in coeducational schools, the single-sex advantage was greater for the boys than it was for the girls.
This report was widely publicized in British newspapers: see for example Alison Gordon's article for the Daily Mail, "In a class of their own: boys benefit even more than girls from single-sex schools, A-level grades study reveals," June 11 2000. But, as near as we can tell, this study has never been reported or even mentioned in any American newspaper or magazine.
Here's a quotation from Graham Able's report:
The unsubstantiated mythology of the educational establishment has been that girls do better in single sex schools but that boys are "brought on" by the more studious girls in a co-educational environment. This mythology has never been supported by any objective evidence, and any policy derived from it must presumably sacrifice the advantages to one sex in order to promote the cause of the other. . . [Our] results suggest that single sex schools give an even greater academic advantage to boys than for girls. This directly contradicts the popular educational myth that boys do better in the classroom if girls are present to set them a good example. One could reasonably conclude from this study that both boys and girls are academically disadvantaged in co-educational schools, but that the disadvantage is greater for the boys.If you'd like to read the entire study, you can obtain a copy from us either by writing us at NASSPE, Post Office Box 108, 19710 Fisher Avenue, Poolesville, Maryland, 20837. Or, you can send an e-mail to NASSPE, or call us at 301 972 7600, or send a fax to 301 972 8006.
A "before-and-after" experiment right here in the United States also suggests that single-sex education may be more beneficial for boys than for girls, at least in the elementary school age group. Two years ago, Benjamin Wright -- principal of the Thurgood Marshall Elementary School, a public school in a low-income area of Seattle, Washington -- segregated his school by sex. Nothing else changed: the class sizes remained the same, the teacher salaries remained the same, etc. The only change was that the classes were now single-sex. That simple change had a dramatic effect. As Mr. Wright described it in May 2002, "In the [coed] environment that we had before, we spent most of our time taking care of crises. Now we're actually teaching kids. In terms of bullying: we've almost completely stopped that. Once we split the classes, the boys went from the 10th percentile to the 73rd percentile [on the Washington Assessment of Student Learning]. The girls remained pretty stable. They stayed in the same percentile that they were in." In this case, the single-sex environment was dramatically effective for boys, but apparently had little effect -- at least in terms of standardized test scores -- for the girls (keep in mind that the girls were already scoring substantially higher than the boys).
So what makes single-sex education so effective for boys? The advantages of single-sex education for boys fall into two basic categories: 1) a more diverse and well-rounded educational experience, and 2) custom-tailored instruction. Let's look at each of these.
If you've visited many coed public schools, you've certainly encountered many rigid gender stereotypes, particularly with regard to boys. A boy at a coed public high school, for example, can be either a "geek" or a jock, but rarely both. When's the last time you heard about a star high school football player who was also the class valedictorian? When's the last time you heard about a star high school football player who would even talk to the class valedictorian? At a coed high school, if you're a boy, you're either a "geek" or a jock, but not both.
Joe Coleman, director of admissions at the Woodberry Forest School in Virginia (an all-boys' school), shared this story with us. Last year, twelve of the players on the varsity football team also were in the school musical the following winter. They went to auditions right after the football season ended! That's amazing, really. We challenge anyone to find a coed school, public or private, anywhere in the United States, where even two of the varsity football players were in the school musical. Or even just one player! It just doesn't happen. At a coed school, a boy can be either a "jock" or a "drama geek" but never both. In fact, at coed schools, the jocks don't even talk to the drama geeks, and the drama geeks despise and disdain the jocks. The jocks and the drama geeks don't sit together, they don't eat together, they don't even know each others' names. The football players don't go to see the musicals, and the drama geeks don't go to the football games. But at a single-sex school, those gender stereotypes can just melt away. At a single-sex school, it's fine for an athlete to go out for the musical. It's not even a big deal, really. At a single-sex school, kids have much greater freedom to find out who they really are, without the pressure of what Diane Ruble (at NYU) and others have referred to as gender intensification: the pressure to behave and act in accordance with the particular gender stereotype you've adopted. And this leads to the great irony: Coed schools tend to reinforce gender stereotypes, while single-sex schools allow kids to break free from gender stereotypes. It's ironic, because one might intuitively expect just the opposite. But in fact all the research supports what we have just said: boys at single-sex schools are much more likely to pursue interests in art, music, drama, and foreign languages, whereas girls at single-sex schools are much more likely to take courses in advanced math, physics, information technology, etc
Historian Steven Millies shared with us how attending a single-sex high school changed his life. "I began high school more shy than most adolescents," he recalls. "But I did take the enormous step of joining the speech team, and that opened a new world to me. It led me to other activities, and eventually to writing a column for the school paper. The capstone came during my senior year when I debated a fiery teacher about the Vietnam War in front of four history classes. The event drew so much attention that other people wanted to attend. By the end of the day, we had been seen by practically everyone in the school. These experiences were an awakening. I strongly believe that they made possible the development of interests and skills that led me to undertake a PhD in history. When I think back on the catalyst -- joining the speech team -- and I consider the fact that forensics in Illinois is dominated by girls, about 70/30, I cannot imagine that I would have joined the team in a coed school. Even leaving shyness out of the question, it would have been a ‘girls' thing.' Knowing the south side of Chicago as I do, I have to believe that any boy who joined the team would have been making himself a target. I needed the chance to explore my own potential without worrying about looking foolish in front of the girls."
Boys at single-sex schools have more diverse role models of their own sex. Andrew Hunter, a school principal who has taught at both coed and single-sex schools, says that "there is a subtle pressure toward gender stereotyping in mixed schools. In boys' schools, boys feel free to be themselves, to follow their interests and talents in what might be regarded as non-macho pursuits: music, arts, drama." We've heard from many young men who have shared how their interest in poetry, or history, etc. only began after they enrolled in a single-sex school. In the single-sex environment, they didn't feel any embarrassment in showing an interest in those "non-macho" activities.
Brian Walsh, who has been a principal at private boys' schools and private coed schools in New England, made this observation: "Boys ordinarily do not even try to sing in a coed school, whereas they love choral singing in a boys' school; in the coed setting they make fun of French pronunciation, whereas in the single-sex setting they enjoy becoming fluent in French; in drama, they muck up or clown around to avoid seeming imperfect in a coed setting, whereas they excel at drama when by themselves."
A recent nationwide study by Marcia Gentry and her associates, published in the Journal of Educational Psychology, confirmed what many earlier studies had suggested: at every age, boys in coed schools are less enthusiastic about school than girls are. This finding holds whether you're looking at urban schools or rural schools, affluent schools or schools located in low-income communities. And, as boys get older, the "enthusiasm gap" widens. The older boys get, the more they tend to perceive doing well in school as "geeky." Boys perceive the coed school as an institution run largely by women and run largely according to women's rules: sit still, don't make too much noise, don't be disruptive. They see that the top students are girls, and the "teacher's pet" is either a girl or a "feminized male" (to use Patricia Cayo Sexton's rather derogatory term). So, boys come to devalue academic excellence. If you're a boy at a coed school, being an "A" student does not raise your status with other boys. At most coed schools, being an "A" student will lower your status with other boys. Source: Marcia Gentry, Robert Gable, and Mary Rizza, "Students' perceptions of classroom activities: are there grade-level and gender differences?" Journal of Educational Psychology, volume 94, number 3 (September 2002), pages 539-544.
Boys' schools can tailor the curriculum to the way boys learn. Experienced teachers know that the best way to get boys energized to learn is to keep the classroom loud and lively. The teacher never stops moving. A boy never knows where that teacher will be 20 seconds from now. The teacher roams the class, speaking in a loud voice, involving every student. "Mr. Taylor! Tell us please what your opinion is on this matter!" The experienced teacher at a boys' school always addresses his students as "Mr." -- even in third grade. "If you treat them as men, they're more likely to behave as men," one teacher told us.
Most boys will perk up and show some interest if you talk about things that are dangerous, or immense, or "yucky." The boy who was bored by biology at the coed school will be interested if you bring in some black garden snakes. The boy who fell asleep in chemistry class will be energized if you give him an assignment to do a PowerPoint presentation on dynamite, with lots of pictures of things blowing up. Most boys enjoy blowing things up (or at least imagining blowing things up). The high school boy who says he doesn't like to read might enjoy The Hot Zone (a non-fiction book about an Ebola-like virus isolated near Washington, DC several years ago).
The first task of any teacher who hopes to teach boys is to get the boys interested. As recent research shows, that's no easy task. Boys' schools have a natural advantage, because they can tailor their curriculum to topics that interest boys, and teach those topics in ways that keep the boys engaged.
©2002 Leonard Sax, MD, PhDClick here to return to the NASSPE home page.