Single-sex schools: the last bastion of acceptable school segregation?

How on earth in these days of inclusive education and inclusive everything are these schools not only tolerated but in receipts of hundreds of millions of state money? With the baptism barrier now removed, why is the gender barrier still acceptable? Indeed, baptism barrier or not, plenty of Catholics went to Protestant schools and vice versa. How many males were allowed attend female schools, and vice versa?

For instance, how can it be legal to exclude a girl who loves science from the local (state-funded privately-owned) school which has the best science facilities but is all-male? Or how can it be fair to exclude a very academic boy from attending the local (state-funded privately-owned) all girls school that has the strongest academic record in the area?

Replace male and female with black and white and we have the 'Separate but equal' segregation of the United States & South Africa.

Interesting Cornell study, from a US perspective, about the likely effect of Brown v. Board of Education (the famous 1954 judgement that ended racial segregation in US schools) on single sex schools if challenged: Gary J. Simon,'Separate but equal and single-sex schools'

Ireland has one of the highest proportions of single-sex schools when compared with other western countries. More than one third of second level schools here are single sex. 17% of primary school children attend single-sex schools.

The US study found that differences between the sexes grew in sex-segregated environments, making positive interaction between boys and girls more difficult... (RTÉ: 'Single-sex schools not superior')

myshirt

No

I know for a fact that my schooling would not have been as successful if there were ladies in the class. I either wouldn't have been able to concentrate or I'd have constantly been hassled by all the bitching. It was great to be able to get some work done, and park the girls until the evening time and weekends.

Your Face

Well done OP for raising awareness of this shocking abuse of human rights.

steddyeddy

I'm living in England where a bunch of old Etonians have destroyed the country by taking it out of the EU. It reminds me that class segregation is very much present in schools too. Sexism should go too IMHO.

Four Phucs Ache

I went to a mixed secondary, after 2nd year I noticed sinead, Debbie, Angela and many others. To this day all I can remember is that Mr o' connell got really annoyed when I would provide the answer in maths without showing how I worked it out.

Pug160

myshirt wrote: »

I know for a fact that my schooling would not have been as successful if there were ladies in the class. I either wouldn't have been able to concentrate or I'd have constantly been hassled by all the bitching. It was great to be able to get some work done, and park the girls until the evening time and weekends.

You might think that but it does appear as though it benefits boys and provides a calming effect but has more of a negative impact on girls. Probably due to the fact that girls are very self conscious at that age. Not that boys aren't, but girls more so.

It's somewhat of a complicated issue, like most things. Lots of pros and cons either way.

wakka12

Personally I hated being in an all boys school. But theres studies that show girls and boys do better/worse depending on the gender of their class, which is significant. So I think there should be options for parents to send their children to same gender schools based on that evidence. But no the state shouldnt pay for them, segregated gender schools should be a specialised school and privilege the parents deems important enough to pay extra for

sunshinew

myshirt wrote: »

I know for a fact that my schooling would not have been as successful if there were ladies in the class. I either wouldn't have been able to concentrate or I'd have constantly been hassled by all the bitching. It was great to be able to get some work done, and park the girls until the evening time and weekends.

Some studies have shown boys do better in mixed education. And that mixed education is much better in socially preparing both sexes for life after school. The way you've described women sounds like they're either a sexual thing for you or not worthy of your time which is a shame if so and maybe you missed out on genuine female friendships growing up.
I think this segregation could play a part in the constant battle being played out on which sex has it worse. It emphasises the differences and not what we have in common. I think I'd have preferred a mixed school as I really value the male friendships I've made in adulthood. Saying that I was an awkward shy teenager so maybe having teenage boys witness that on a daily basis would have just made my cringy memories even worse.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Replace male and female with black and white and we have the 'Separate but equal' segregation of the United States & South Africa.

We most certainly do not, as neither sex denied education. I’m fully supportive of single sex schools for both boys and girls and I’ve yet to see a convincing argument that would actually convince me of the benefits of mixed schools.

Pug160

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We most certainly do not, as neither sex denied education. I’m fully supportive of single sex schools for both boys and girls and I’ve yet to see a convincing argument that would actually convince me of the benefits of mixed schools.

I can appreciate that people have different views on this but I am surprised to see that you have not been convinced of any benefits of mixed sex schools at all. At the very least there are some plausible theories that are more or less common sense. From what I have read girls' grades do drop to some extent in mixed schools and boys seem to be a bit more stable overall. Although to be honest I've never looked into it extensively. If you've done a lot of research on it and have come to an objective conclusion then fair enough.

I know some of us may feel we missed out in some way by being deprived of a mixed education so I'm being careful and trying my best to wear my critical thinking hat here. My long standing belief is that boys in particular benefit from it and that if I ever had a son I would probably be more inclined to send him to a mixed sex school as a kind of safety net. In regards to social interaction - it's true that many people do just fine after they leave a same sex school. But that's dependant on other factors. If they have a well rounded social life outside of school hours they'll probably be grand. But what about the ones who don't - for any number of reasons.

As for grades: it would depend how badly it would affect them. My belief is that IQ is - for the most part - down to genetics. So as long as the school was providing a decent education I would favour hedging my bets. I do admit that it is complicated though and it would need a lot of careful thought.

Segregate your bollocks while you're at it, two cheeks of the same arse.

Mrs OBumble

No

Some kids are suited to mixed gender, some to same sex. It's best to have both options in the system.

Girls schools on the whole are better at role modelling women in leadership positions to their students.

One eyed Jack

Pug160 wrote: »

I can appreciate that people have different views on this but I am surprised to see that you have not been convinced of any benefits of mixed sex schools at all. At the very least there are some plausible theories that are more or less common sense. From what I have read girls' grades do drop to some extent in mixed schools and boys seem to be a bit more stable overall. Although to be honest I've never looked into it extensively. If you've done a lot of research on it and have come to an objective conclusion then fair enough.

I know some of us may feel we missed out in some way by being deprived of a mixed education so I'm being careful and trying my best to wear my critical thinking hat here. My long standing belief is that boys in particular benefit from it and that if I ever had a son I would probably be more inclined to send him to a mixed sex school as a kind of safety net. In regards to social interaction - it's true that many people do just fine after they leave a same sex school. But that's dependant on other factors. If they have a well rounded social life outside of school hours they'll probably be grand. But what about the ones who don't - for any number of reasons.

As for grades: it would depend how badly it would affect them. My belief is that IQ is - for the most part - down to genetics. So as long as the school was providing a decent education I would favour hedging my bets. I do admit that it is complicated though and it would need a lot of careful thought.

That’s basically one of the main benefits being touted of mixed sex schools, that they encourage understanding between the genders, but as you point out there are numerous contributing factors to an individuals interpersonal skills in later life, and the studies done to suggest one thing or another ignore empirical evidence that the vast majority of adults interpersonal skills who have attended single sex schools turned out just fine.

One of the benefits of single sex schools from my perspective is that it helps their networking skills among their peers of the same sex, friendships which last them into adulthood, as opposed to this sort of crap -


Schools are banning best friends to protect students' feelings

nozzferrahhtoo

Two things strike me about that "benefit" however.

The first is that I see no reason why a single sex school particularly fosters such relationships, or mixed sex schools particularly preclude or hinder them. As long as people of the same gender are present, then people will develop such skills with same sex peers and friendships that will last them into adult hood. The presence of another gender at the same time in no way precludes or hinders that in my experience or to my knowledge.

The second is that I see no reason to automatically assume it to be a benefit at all. Why, if we are developing skills among peers and friendships that last to adult hood, is it particularly relevant or important or in any way beneficial that we form them with people of our own gender? Why does gender need to be relevant at all? Forming networking skills, communication, and long term friendships with other PEOPLE is what is important. The contents of their underwear while they do this, not so much. In fact I would go in the opposite direction and suggest that if single sex schools are fostering the idea at all that such things should be formed with ones own gender, rather than people in general, then this is not only not positive, but is actively a negative.

So yes not seeing it as being a "benefit" at all, and even if I did I am not seeing that single sex schools particular or specifically foster that "benefit" over any other configuration in the first place.

silverharp

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Two things strike me about that "benefit" however.

The first is that I see no reason why a single sex school particularly fosters such relationships, or mixed sex schools particularly preclude or hinder them. As long as people of the same gender are present, then people will develop such skills with same sex peers and friendships that will last them into adult hood. The presence of another gender at the same time in no way precludes or hinders that in my experience or to my knowledge.

The second is that I see no reason to automatically assume it to be a benefit at all. Why, if we are developing skills among peers and friendships that last to adult hood, is it particularly relevant or important or in any way beneficial that we form them with people of our own gender? Why does gender need to be relevant at all? Forming networking skills, communication, and long term friendships with other PEOPLE is what is important. The contents of their underwear while they do this, not so much. In fact I would go in the opposite direction and suggest that if single sex schools are fostering the idea at all that such things should be formed with ones own gender, rather than people in general, then this is not only not positive, but is actively a negative.

So yes not seeing it as being a "benefit" at all, and even if I did I am not seeing that single sex schools particular or specifically foster that "benefit" over any other configuration in the first place.

Ive no strong opinions on one versus the other, my kids are in a mixed school but if my son asked , I'd say focus on having a core of male friends on the basis that he would be more likely to make to life long friends or at least friends past school, that was my experience anyway.

Shenshen

It depends (state in post)

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Some kids are suited to mixed gender, some to same sex. It's best to have both options in the system.

Girls schools on the whole are better at role modelling women in leadership positions to their students.

I would disagree with the last statement - I went to an all-girl secondary school, and while the education itself was probably as good as any, it left me completely without the skill of making oneself heard and listened to in a predominantly male group. It took me years to acquire that skill once I entered working life. In hindsight, it cost me a lot of chances of progressing in my early career.

PhoenixParker

The most convincing study I've seen suggested that mixed was best except for the ages of 11ish to 16ish when it's better to separate the sexes.

It's a long time since I read it but it stuck with me because it seems like common sense too. Those are the ages when hormones really go haywire and you're learning to deal with a whole new you. Once kids are past the worst hormonal explosion/peer pressure phase its time to let them develop mature social skills.

My daughter went to a mixed junior school. but is now at a fee paying, protestant all girls school. (stands back and waits for Fuaranach to spontaneously combust).

It might not suit all girls, but she has a wide social group outside of the school and has no issues with boys whatsoever (other than finally realising that teenage boys, especially Blackrock ones, are a lesser species).

no regrets about sending her there at all, although i do occasionally miss the kidney I had to sell to pay for the fees :rolleyes:

Your Face

It depends (state in post)

Your Face wrote: »

Well done OP for raising awareness of this shocking abuse of human rights.

Delighted to make even one less benighted soul in the world.

Aegir wrote: »

My daughter went to a mixed junior school. but is now at a fee paying, protestant all girls school. (stands back and waits for Fuaranach to spontaneously combust).

Excellent; sexist and sectarian state-funded schools. Not to mention the cultural apartheid - only English sports played here, old chap - which unites all the Dublin fee-charging schools without exception. Impressive. The year 1860 called and it wants its school system back.

Aegir wrote: »

no regrets about sending her there at all, although i do occasionally miss the kidney I had to sell to pay for the fees :rolleyes:

These state-funded fee-charging (they're certainly not fee-paying) schools and their €6,000 per child per annum fees are faux elitism at its most cringeworthy in a society where childcare is over €1000 per child per month and most ordinary Irish parents, at least in Dublin, pay it. "Elite" my eye. The notions are even more shocking than the, loike, affected accents.

seamus

This argument here is about what you believe the ultimate purpose of school is.

If you believe its purpose is academic achievement and nothing else, then the environment should be constructed in a way that optimally achieves that.

However, if you believe that its purpose is to prepare children to be happy people who function well in society, and not just about passing tests and picking a career, then it seems that an environment which most closely matches the conditions of society is the most optimal.

I say that as someone who went to a same sex school. There was a huge social learning curve for the first 5-10 years after leaving school.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Excellent; sexist and sectarian state-funded schools.

not really. Their pastoral care is provided by the Church of Ireland, but they do not own the school. The School's actual religious philosophy is that it is for children of all faiths and none. The largest religious group is probably Catholic though.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not to mention the cultural apartheid - only English sports played here, old chap - which unites all the Dublin fee-charging schools without exception. Impressive. The year 1860 called and it wants its school system back.

I guess that would be correct, but only if you consider Hockey, Basketball and Athletics "English". Personally i wouldn't.

Deleted User wrote: »

These state-funded fee-charging (they're certainly not fee-paying) schools and their €6,000 per child per annum fees are faux elitism at its most cringeworthy in a society where childcare is over €1000 per child per month and most ordinary Irish parents, at least in Dublin, pay it. "Elite" my eye. The notions are even more shocking than the, loike, affected accents.

I would agree with that. There is a wide range of kids at the school though as they give out a lot of scholarships. Personally I wanted my child to have the best possible education i could afford as i am sure a lot of parents do. I was joking about the kidney, but we make a lot of sacrifices for her to go there and if she didn't, i would certainly be driving a nicer car or going on more holidays.

There are some parents though who i am convinced send their kids to that particular school because they simply don't want their child mixing with the hoi polloi and this does make my blood boil. Not as much as the idea that i should somehow be ashamed for sending her there though.

Mrs OBumble

No

Shenshen wrote: »

I would disagree with the last statement - I went to an all-girl secondary school, and while the education itself was probably as good as any, it left me completely without the skill of making oneself heard and listened to in a predominantly male group. It took me years to acquire that skill once I entered working life. In hindsight, it cost me a lot of chances of progressing in my early career.

I got a part time in McDonald's and got paid to learn how to work in mixed gender and ethnicity groups at the weekend, while going to a school with females in all leadership positions.

Not all learning needs to happen in school.

evolving_doors

No

Shenshen wrote: »

I would disagree with the last statement - I went to an all-girl secondary school, and while the education itself was probably as good as any, it left me completely without the skill of making oneself heard and listened to in a predominantly male group. It took me years to acquire that skill once I entered working life. In hindsight, it cost me a lot of chances of progressing in my early career.

I went to all male school and could say the same (left me completely without the skill of making oneself heard and listened to in a predominantly male group).

One eyed Jack

seamus wrote: »

This argument here is about what you believe the ultimate purpose of school is.

If you believe its purpose is academic achievement and nothing else, then the environment should be constructed in a way that optimally achieves that.

However, if you believe that its purpose is to prepare children to be happy people who function well in society, and not just about passing tests and picking a career, then it seems that an environment which most closely matches the conditions of society is the most optimal.

I say that as someone who went to a same sex school. There was a huge social learning curve for the first 5-10 years after leaving school.

I’m guessing that’s meant to be an argument for mixed sex schools, but I don’t get how you’re actually suggesting that’s how we all see conditions in society?

If it were, then the numbers of my female friends who went to all-girls schools and later in life they are now in leadership positions challenging what they perceive to be male-dominated career paths (men who as boys went to all-boys schools), encouraging and empowering other young women to follow their lead, effectively changing the conditions of society, wouldn’t be doing so.

There’s no question from my perspective at least that both sets of adults are happy, well-adjusted, successful in their careers and so on, functioning well in society, and they are high academic achievers, and high achievers in other areas of society too such as sports and politics.

That social learning curve you mention seems to be more of an individual thing than anything to do with how either the school environment or the conditions of society are structured.

Pug160

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That’s basically one of the main benefits being touted of mixed sex schools, that they encourage understanding between the genders, but as you point out there are numerous contributing factors to an individuals interpersonal skills in later life, and the studies done to suggest one thing or another ignore empirical evidence that the vast majority of adults interpersonal skills who have attended single sex schools turned out just fine.

One of the benefits of single sex schools from my perspective is that it helps their networking skills among their peers of the same sex, friendships which last them into adulthood, as opposed to this sort of crap -


Schools are banning best friends to protect students' feelings

I get your point but I think we're just entering a time when a lot of this mollycoddling will be promoted everywhere - so I'm not sure if single sex schools will necessarily offer an escape route from it. I think there is a kind of implication that same sex schools will be more likely to provide a foundation where masculinity will get to flourish. I actually acknowledge that that may be a valid point if it's what is being alluded to. But in saying that I'm not sure if I quite see the logic in your networking theory. It also seems plausible to me that being in a mixed sex school might make girls tougher in the long run. So I don't think all the potential benefits are for boys.

Mixed sex education is probably not going to be some kind of miracle cure for everything, but I do think it's apparent that there is a somewhat unhealthy and backwards relationship between the sexes here in broad terms and tackling it before adulthood seems like the obvious way forward. Sure, we can have an ''I'm alright Jack'' attitude to it but surely it's in our best interest to make sure that a larger proportion of society gets the best shot possible at having a decent future. I don't know the answers and once again admit that it is a complicated issue. We're probably heading for a very different future now anyway, with technology becoming an ever bigger part of our lives.

AllForIt

No idea what single sex schools are for nowadays. I can see how they originated originally as the subjects taught may be significantly different like domestic skills for girls , sewing etc but in current times I think it just adds a layer of complexity to the logistics of schooling that is complexity unnecessary so it seems to me to be a rather antiquated system that should be done away with.

One eyed Jack

Pug160 wrote: »

I get your point but I think we're just entering a time when a lot of this mollycoddling will be promoted everywhere - so I'm not sure if single sex schools will necessarily offer an escape route from it. I think there is a kind of implication that same sex schools will be more likely to provide a foundation where masculinity will get to flourish. I actually acknowledge that that may be a valid point if it's what is being alluded to. But in saying that I'm not sure if I quite see the logic in your networking theory. It also seems plausible to me that being in a mixed sex school might make girls tougher in the long run. So I don't think all the potential benefits are for boys.

Ahh no, I don't think we are really entering a time when the sort of mollycoddling in the example I gave will be promoted everywhere. The reason I used that example specifically is precisely because it's at the extreme end of the scale. You're right that I was alluding to same sex schools being more likely to provide a foundation where not just masculinity, but also femininity flourishes in same sex schools for girls, and the logic in the networking theory is basically that the people coming from those schools, will essentially have their own network through which they will 'promote their own' so to speak. It's not really about making girls tougher, they really don't need to be, they need to be assertive and competitive, as boys are taught to be assertive and competitive. If we look at the top ten schools in the country, as compiled by The Sunday Times in August of last year, all the top 10 schools are same sex schools, and the top five schools in the country are all-girls schools!

According to the ranking of schools, the top five schools in the country are all girls schools. Over 85% of the top 5 schools went on to study at university and nearly 100% of the students went on to study at third-level. The best all boys school in the country is Glenstal Abbey School, Murroe, Limerick and the best mixed school is Colaiste na Coiribhe, Knocknacarra, Galway.

The Top 10 in Ireland

Out of the 400 schools featured in the guide, here are the top ten secondary schools in Ireland:

1. Laurel Hill Colaiste FCJ, Sth Circular Road, Limerick
2. Scoil Mhuire, Sidney Place, Cork
3. Salerno Jesus and Mary Secondary School, Salthill, Galway
4. The Teresian School, Donnybrook, Dublin 4
5. Colaiste Iosagain, Booterstown, Co. Dublin
6. Glenstal Abbey School, Murroe, Limerick
7. Presentation Brothers College, Mardyke, Cork
8. Christian Brothers College, Sidney Hill, Cork
9. Gonzaga College, Ranelagh, Dublin 6
10. Loreto College, St Stephen's Green, Dublin 2

Pug160 wrote: »

Mixed sex education is probably not going to be some kind of miracle cure for everything, but I do think it's apparent that there is a somewhat unhealthy and backwards relationship between the sexes here in broad terms and tackling it before adulthood seems like the obvious way forward. Sure, we can have an ''I'm alright Jack'' attitude to it but surely it's in our best interest to make sure that a larger proportion of society gets the best shot possible at having a decent future. I don't know the answers and once again admit that it is a complicated issue. We're probably heading for a very different future now anyway, with technology becoming an ever bigger part of our lives.

I agree with you that mixed sex education is definitely not some kind of miracle cure for everything, but as seamus pointed out - it depends upon what we believe the ultimate purpose of school is (seamus went on to present a false dichotomy, but the point still stands), and when I say 'we', I mean it is parents who will decide what form of education they believe is in the best interests of their children. I'm ok with parents who decide that it is in their children's best interests to send their children to mixed-sex schools, y'know? It doesn't bother me in the slightest. They're doing what they believe is in the best interests of their children. I also know many parents who home-school their children and again it goes back to the idea of networking - there are great support networks in place now for parents in Ireland who choose to home-school their children. One of the most common arguments you'll hear against the idea is what's being discussed here - that some people believe it stunts the children's social development. I'm not sure of their experiences with home-schooling, but from my experiences of meeting with and working with families who choose to home-school their children, those kinds of arguments are simply without foundation.

With regard to any apparent unhealthy and backwards relationship between the sexes, it's not that apparent to me at least? As far as I can see there's no broader issue between the sexes that needs to be addressed. There are a minority of individuals who have identified what they deem to be an unhealthy and backwards relationship between the sexes, according to their standards, and that's fine. Nobody has to entertain them. We're not obliged to entertain them, same as we're not obliged to entertain any notions that same sex schools are indeed the last bastion of acceptable social segregation. It goes back again to what seamus said - that it really does depend upon each individual what they believe is the ultimate purpose of school. People are going to disagree, but the good thing about the existence of same sex schools and indeed mixed sex schools, is that it gives parents options for what they believe is the best outcome for their children.