Erin+Birdsall

=My Notes= COHN, KATHLEEN C.; COHN, CARL A.. "SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES IN LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA: THE QUEST FOR HIGHER STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, BEHAVIOR, AND DRESS STANDARDS.." //Education// 119. (1998):181(1). //eLibrary//. Web. 29 Apr. 2010.

Con online classes Reasons for Holding Classes : When teaching introductory or survey courses, students are operating at various intellectual levels and are new to the field. They have many questions. Also, classes provide the opportunity for testing, which is problematic when teaching completely online (self-assessment testing is preferable in strictly online courses. See below). Not only can quizzes be given in class, but also the instructor can discuss them once they are collected. Large classes can use objective (multiple-choice, true-false) testing, short answer questions, etc, where the instructor's time is a concern. Essay exams are unnecessary to check content acquisition but may be used to gauge understanding. If understanding is the goal, more face-to-face classroom time is appropriate. [|reasons for having real class]

While some research finds in favour of single - sex schools, other studies have questioned the academic and social advantages offered by single - sex schooling, arguing that the findings are inconclusive at best. Some researchers have suggested that school factors, such as school size or organization, contribute more to positive outcomes than gender separation. Other researchers also argue that single -gender educational settings promote stereotypical gender roles and attitudes towards the opposite sex. A significant limitation is that most studies of single - sex schooling have been conducted in the private sector and therefore may not generalize to public schools.

- Policies were implemented in such a way that some students were strongly encouraged to join certain single -gender academies, rather than selecting them by choice. White, average or high-achieving students were more likely to choose freely to attend. A number of the single -gender academies became a mechanism by which districts could educate low-achieving, low-income and/or minority "at-risk" youth.

- Despite educators ' interests in offering equal opportunity, discipline and instructional practices differed for boys and girls, and these differences were often based on the gender stereotypes of educators. Boys were, for example, often subjected to a more disciplinary environment while girls were treated in a more nurturing, open manner. Girls tended to be given more opportunities to work in collaborative groups and engage in discussion, whereas boys were taught in a more traditional, individualistic fashion.

- Students received mixed messages about gender. For example, while both boys and girls were told that women can do anything they want, girls were also made aware of restrictions on their behaviour, reinforced through expectations about clothing and appearance. Definitions of being a man included the assumption that men would be the primary wage earners in their families, as well as the assumption that men are emotionally stronger than women.

- While opposite- sex distractions were eliminated in single -gender classrooms, there was some evidence that single -gender classes exacerbated teasing and disruptive behaviour among boys and cattiness among girls. Opposite- sex distractions also continued in the co- educational spaces of single -gender schools-within-a-school.

- An unexpected type of harassment for students in single -gender classrooms came from peers who were in co- educationalsingle -gender academy either meant a student was gay or posed the threat of "becoming" gay. Being gay, or perceived as gay, was seen by students as a grave insult; most teachers did little to address the repercussions of homophobic comments.

In reality, the California public single -gender schools were very different from their counterparts in the private school system. We found a number of factors that made implementing and sustaining the public single -gender academies quite complicated and beyond the realm of what might occur in the private system. They included:

Vulnerability to Political Forces

Following a change in the governorship of California, the single -gender public schools no longer had state support and no longer received special funding. Most of the schools suffered from lack of district support as super-intendents struggled to respond to more pressing interests, such as improving students' test scores or financial concerns. Four of the six districts in the pilot program closed after two years and a fifth closed after three years. (The sixth continues to operate.)

Implementation Challenges

Educators were hampered at the outset by short timelines to propose and begin operation of the academies and an absence of legislated state support and monitoring. They had little time to plan for the academies, engage the support of constituencies, recruit qualified teachers, and advertise the new option for students. Once the academies were operational, they continued to suffer from implementation difficulties, including staff and leadership turnover, administrative burdens, and student recruitment difficulties.

Absence of Commitment

Most administrators were attracted to the generous grant that was offered by the state to start single -gender academies, and their commitment to single -gender education was secondary to meeting the pressing needs of students in their communities and/or expanding educational offerings. Alternately, private single -gender schools often have an identifiable mission and purpose, though admittedly not always oriented towards increasing gender equity (e.g., all-boys military schools).

Level of Interest Among Parents and Students

Many students and their parents elected to attend the single -gender academies because the schools offered smaller classes and increased resources, not because of the single -gender environment. In some districts, the academies operated under capacity due to insufficient public interest or due to difficulties in advertising the choice option. Educators must be aware that when single -gender schools or classes are housed on the same campus as co- educational schools and/or are staffed by the same teachers, students can be subjected to stereotyping, comparisons, and interactions with the opposite sex that lead to harassment and distractions that would normally not occur in self-contained, single -gender schools. If girls and boys are separated for instruction but combined for social activities, there is also the risk that girls and boys will see each other only in social, rather than intellectual terms.

Datnow, Amanda; Hubbard, Lea. "Single-sex public schooling: lessons from California's experiment." //Orbit//. 01 Jan. 2004: 9. //eLibrary//. Web. 29 Apr. 2010. [|same-sex schooling]

more about same sex education

To create a page...
>
 * 1) Click on the edit button [[image:edit.jpg]]
 * 2) Type the title of the page. Use a descriptive title not just "notes 1."
 * 3) Highlight the text and click the link button in the menu bar.
 * 4) In the Page Name text box **__add your name to the end of the title of the page__** and press add link.
 * 1) This will create a hyperlink to a page that doesn't exist. When you go to the page you will be prompted to edit this new page. **__Make sure that you choose the Notes page template.__**