Single-sex+3

= RAHS Note Page =

Source
http://elibrary.bigchalk.com/elibweb/elib/do/document?set=search&dictionaryClick=&secondaryNav=&groupid=1&requestid=lib_standard&resultid=23&edition=&ts=6C26CE55B50DE40B8509A1FCF9BA6B50_1272853506034&start=1&publicationId=&urn=urn%3Abigchalk%3AUS%3BBCLib%3Bdocument%3B104312479

Summary/Direct Quote
These benefits were blunted in the California case by disadvantages, including:

- 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-educational classrooms. Harassment came in the form of homophobic comments, following the assumption that enrolment in a single-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.

Connected Topics/Uses
Single-gender classes become low-achieving, low-income and/or minority schools because all of the more wealthy, high-achieving students choose to attend normal schools. The article also talks about the possibility of the kids becoming gay and harassment and bullying occurring because of it.