girls-+gym+classes

= RAHS Note Page =

Source
Gabbei, Ritchie. "Achieving Balance: Secondary Physical Education Gender-Grouping Options." //Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance// 3(2004):33. //eLibrary//. Web. 29 Apr. 2010.

http://elibrary.bigchalk.com/elibweb/elib/do/document?set=search&dictionaryClick=&secondaryNav=advance&groupid=1&requestid=lib_standard&resultid=1&edition=&ts=F0FB6896AED144E5BE876387974F088B_1272898243533&start=1&publicationId=&urn=urn%3Abigchalk%3AUS%3BBCLib%3Bdocument%3B122281837

Summary/Direct Quote
National and state physical education learning standards were established so that all students would be held to a single standard of measuring skill and progress (CFR Â§ 106.34[b]). Evidence exists demonstrating that female students have difficulty achieving or improving skill in coed classes, thus creating an unfair and adverse impact on female students. In many cases it is likely that the use of single- gender classes will provide a better opportunity for female students to achieve these standards.

Coed classes greatly increase the amount and range of instructional needs, making task selection difficult for teachers (Chambers, 1988). Much of the literature describing gender equity in classes points out that male students receive more attention than female students (Allard, 1979; Strazzulla, 1986). The responsibility for this inequity is typically placed on the teacher's implicit or explicit sexist behaviors. However, this may be unfair, because the classroom is a complex ecology of personalities, issues, and agendas.

Many teachers believe that the single- gender grouping is a better composition for achieving learning objectives because it eliminates the negative interactions and influences between male and female students (Gabbei & Mitchell, 2001b). Some teachers report feeling little power to achieve gender equity in coed classes. Even teachers trained and committed to teach equitably find it difficult to achieve (Griffin, 1985b). Ultimately, teacher beliefs and assessments of student needs play an important role in the equity of instruction. Teachers who indicated that single- gender classes were best for learning were found to present tasks more effectively in single- gender, same - gender -as-teacher classes than in coed classes (Gabbei & Mitchell (2001b). Teachers can more effectively address male and female needs and agendas by controlling the classroom ecology through gender -grouping strategies. Single- gender classes can reduce the range of student instructional needs and make task selection more manageable, but many teachers and school districts are concerned with the legal ramifications of single- gender classes.

Regardless of the results of research, most schools instruct physical education in coed groupings out of fear of violating Title IX legislation. However, this decision represents a simplistic view of complex options. Vertinsky (1983) pointed out that Title IX supports coed classes providing "enough exceptions to allow the continuance of separate physical education classes in schools" (p. 377). In fact, Title IX legislation does not stipulate coed classes, but rather states that no person shall "be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program...." The volume of research stating the benefits of single- gender grouping and the drawbacks of coed grouping presents a strong argument that coed classes deny female students the benefits of participation in physical education. Justifiable arguments for single- gender classes should be based on the empirical evidence indicating a more effective learning environment for female students to achieve state and national standards (i.e., CFR Â§ 106.34[b & d]).

Current regulations in effect ignore the benefits that can be derived from single- gender classes (Rapp, 2003). Recognizing the shortcomings of coed groupings, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 calls for greater use of innovative programs to provide single- gender classes that are consistent with the law. As a result, the United States Department of Education has acknowledged that the use of single- gender classes reflects "important and legitimate" efforts to improve achievement for all students (67 Federal Regulations 31098, May 8, 2002). What may have seemed an obvious solution to gender inequality 32 years ago (i.e., coed instruction) has proven not to be the definitive answer in physical education today.