Category: Single Sex Schools

Annotated Bibliography

Dustmann, C, et al. (2018). Why Are Single-Sex Schools Successful? ​Labour Economics​, 54, 79-99.

The author is the World’s foremost labor economist and migration scholars and worked with the following people in the same industry. There are a total of three authors, and they all work in Labour Economics. Dustmann is a German economist who currently serves as a Professor of Economics at the University of London.

This is an article of why single-sex schools are successful, research that took place in academic high schools in Seoul, South Korea. Finding that pupils in single-sex schools outperform their counterparts in coed schools. While for boys, negative effects exposed to mixed-gender bowers are school-level is that class level exposed to mixed-gender peers that explain this disadvantage for girls. We find that within a school with the mess of single six accord conversion or negative for both boys and girls, The disadvantage for boys largely due to all the four environments whereas for girls is exposure to mixed-gender. Students were admitted to high school space on school-specific entrance exams which directly reflected in the performance and advancing graduates into universities. Only having 11 school districts in South Korea each district has 14 schools that boys can attend10 and 13 that girls can attend on average. Coed schools most likely to be public and single-sex schools tend to be larger than coed schools. Between school estimates of attendance a recall and versus a single stack school for CSAT Korean English or math for boys and girls. Private schools are most likely to be religious and have a greater understanding and choosing their teachers which may have independent effects on the achievement of people.

This article will help me with my research topic due to the fact of co-Ed and single-sex education being slightly different in the eyes of others. Such as being tested in for an exam to get into a high school to determine the success you will have in going to a university. Having statistics on the percent of boys and girls from both sides of their success on the test and rates that have dropped. I do believe that this is sufficient information for my topic but is a start from another country’s point of view.

Eliot, Lise. “Single-Sex Education and the Brain.” ​Sex Roles​, vol. 69, no. 7-8, 2011, pp. 363–381., doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0037-y.

The author works in the Department of Neuroscience at the Chicago Medical School, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine & Science. Who had help with this article and is grateful to Peggy Signorella, Diane Halpern, Mark Liberman, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript.

Throughout this article on the popular science versus real science of gender differences in children’s brains. Being a very popular topic in the press for many years, psychologists studied the gender differences in all manner of abilities and traits. Makes having a larger brain than females which varies from height to mass of the heart and kidney. Explaining how children’s brains don’t operate like adults and work fast paste since it isn’t fully developed for any female or male. This ties into single sex-schools advocate the gender difference in reading brain mature develop earlier with girls whereas mathematics develops earlier in boys. The study reported gender differences in the brain, not maturity. While hormones play an important role in how boys and girls behave. Boys and girls start producing adult hormones in their daily life for males or monthly for female cycles, Even after puberty hormones effects on verbal and even moved differences between genders are weak. Although motivating children to learn there are gender learning differences among single-sex schools and coed as everyone is a visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learner.

This source will help me prove a valid argument towards single-sex and co-ed education Because everyone’s brain works differently. Having scientific proof of how it will distinguish how males and females use their brains. Which Hopes what they have a stronger or weaker focus on and if any distractions of her who is most likely to Regain focus in difficult situations. With this evidence given of how hearing maturity vision hormones and learning all tied together with our brains. People not knowing that all this comes from the brain and how much of a big wrote each one individually please in our life, which learning styles help with single-sex or co Ed education for teaching.

Park, Hyunjoon, et al. “Single-Sex Education: Positive Effects.” ​Science​, vol. 335, no. 6065, 2012, pp. 165–166., www.jstor.org/stable/41487129. Accessed 27 Mar. 2020.

I could not find any valid information about this author. Based on this article being a single sex education one-sided point of you acknowledging treatment and control experiences judging the effectiveness of females and males. Based on public and Catholic school queen of the facts of gender single sex is out performance by Catholic schools for public schools in an earlier study. Being no accurate research showing single sex education improve students “academic performances” is incorrect. With the resources shown that single-sex schools produce higher for your college attendance and battery university entrance exam scores and co educational schools were both males and females. Single sex education is a choice made willingly by students and parents because of value to recognize academic and social development for their children, which benefits test scores and college admission. Gender being well balanced, as well with income, region, and education. Based on the information given to me it will give you enough information for a single six sided success. Helping single one-sided education Knowing just because you attend a single sex school does not make you less of a person, or with less information than a public school would give you. Giving great information about how a single sucks cool can give you more information and less distractions in a way to be focused into getting into a four year University. Which are a few hopes and dreams some people have. As well as gender of a female or male-based school fits best for them for their education.

Signorella, M, et al. (1996). Single-Sex Versus Mixed-Sex Classes and Gender Schemata in Children and Adolescents: ​A Longitudinal Comparison. Psychology of Women Quarterly​, 20(4), 599-607.

The authors are researchers who focus on the development and consequences of gender and other social stereotypes. There are a total of four authors and they all work in research focus on the consequences of gender. Signorella is a professor of psychology and women’s gender at Penn State Brandywine. Irene Hanson is a professor of psychology and women’s studies at the University of Pittsburgh.

This being a journal based on single-sex versus mixed-sex classes and gender schemata in children and adolescents, of positive effects that have beneficial results. Having positive effects for women and girls of all-female scores being proposed, research is based on all-female institutions. The study took advantage of a change of private, from girls to both sexes. Girls in single sucks classrooms show to be more stereotyped in the perceptions of mixed-sex Classrooms then girls who are actually in the setting of just females. Although researchers have suggested that schools may have a positive effect on women’s achievement and self-concept, judgment still finds a way to interfere as it difficult for people’s advantages of same-sex education. Two professors have argued that boys receive more attention and I asked more advanced problems than girls. As a study was shown comparing Students in single-sex or mix sex classrooms from a private, non-Catholic school. Students second through 12th grade were surveyed twice at the beginning and end of the school year, allowing time to surpass the impact of classroom overtime. To see if it had any effect, in gender stereotyping in attitudes and classroom perception.

Based on the information is given to me it is sufficient enough to argue both single-sex and co Ed Education, point of view of the advantages is given to them education-wise. As well as explaining achievements and their point of use of success for the children and how they react with the elementary to high school. How it begins at an earlier stage of either distraction or more concentration and the steps it takes to that. Giving them a survey at the beginning of the school year which is very beneficial to record data and after to end with another survey and see the decrease or increase of the gender differences in an environment they aren’t used to or used to.

Today I would like to share my opinion on why I think that all schools should be co-educational. There are many reasons why I believe this, but the three that stand out for me. The first reason is that boys do much better in a school where there are both girls and boys. Second is that’s separating a student from each other teaching us important and crucial lessons for the future. My final reason for believing this is that girls.

Firstly I believe that students, particularly boys In schools with more than 60 per cent girls, boys saw better reading scores if they were at a school with that ratio. The scientists were controlling for a bunch of variables, from school resources to race to the education of parents and teachers, and the results were only really explained by one thing: more girls. Boys were far worse at reading if they were in a school with under 60 per cent girls. A 2004 study found that having girls around shifted the study cultures of schools, encouraging better habits in boys. ‘Girls possibly set a more successful learning climate in the schools and classrooms, to which boys were more susceptible,’ the study suggests. But do boys inspire better habits in girls? However, the idea that single-sex education is always better for girls isn’t universally accepted. A meta-study by the American Psychological Association pulling together data from 184 studies worldwide in 2014 found that single-sex and co-ed schooling only offered ‘trivial’ differences in academic performance. The results involved 1.6 million students from 21 nations aged from kindergarten to grade 12, so it’s one of the most comprehensive studies of the issue ever done.

Secondly, Kids go to school to learn. I agree with that. But one of the things they go to school to learn is about social interaction. How are we supposed to learn social skills and interaction if we are segregated? As growing people, we need to think about our future, and need to learn skills, although we are still young, knowing skills that could help avoid serious problems that could result in things that us as 15/16 years olds don’t and shouldn’t have to. Part of where we learn those skills is at school. You have to give them a safe space to test those things. Children learn how to interact with each other, develop friendships, and learn social skills by being able to be among peers. If you take that away, not only will they lose a much needed social skills tool, they will end up going behind your back to see people. When you tell a child No, they will do their best to do the opposite. Parenting is already hard enough, why make it more difficult? Segregating the sexes during school won’t help. They will only sneak around, and hide things you would rather they be honest with you about. I have four girls. We are all in school. There are little to no results showing that segregation of schools by gender improves academic skills.

A university did a study and determined 18 problems within today’s school system and wondered if there is a solution. Well, there is a solution and it is as simple as opening more single sex schools. Anyone that has ever attended a coed school, has, at one point, wanted to be separated from the other gender. Single sex schools can be summed up easily, ´absolutely genius´! Classroom disruptions, lack of student confidence, and uncomfortable classroom settings are all problems that could be solved by having single sex schools.

First, we all have to be honest and recognize that there are so many disruptions in a classroom. Exposure to even mild classroom disruptions lowers the academic achievement for all students in a class, including those who are highly motivated or top-performing (Rosenberg.) Teachers in single-sex high schools rated problems with student behavior as less serious than teachers in coed schools (US Department of Education.) This problem mainly affects females over males because boys tend to be more disruptive due to late maturity. Not only are they more disruptive, they also tend to be the most disruptive around girls in an attempt to impress or irritate them.

Next, comes the issue of student confidence or feeling comfortable with speaking up. Early research shows that girls reap the most benefits from being together for math and science. They feel more comfortable about their abilities without worrying about how they appear to boys, and they have more opportunity to participate in class discussions. Boys, who are typically more confident in math and science, dominate discussions, and teachers tend to call on boys more often (Kirschenbaum.) Boys also benefit from single sex schools because teachers will adopt a different and better teaching aproach to help them more. Males also may be scared to share their smarts around girls in fear of ruining their masculinity.

The last issue that could be solved is making a more comfortable classroom setting. Proponents say that usually girls prefer warmer temperatures while boys are more comfortable learning in cooler temperatures. By separating girls from boys in classrooms, school administrators can design their classrooms and set the temperature specifically for boys or girls (Regoli.) We have all been in a situation where we have had to sit next to our ex in school. This could be limited by at least half by single gender schools.

The main problems with single sex schools are that it does not prepare them for the real world, less point of views to learn from, and the cost of these new schools. In life we often have to deal with the frustrating opposite gender, so when you limit that interaction at a young age it gives them an unrealistic perception of life. Also, boys and girls are bound to have different views on classroom discussions and when you limit the kids to only hearing on point of view, it limits learning. Lastly, the cost of these new schools will be expensive. There are only 88 single sex schools in the US, so lets say we need 100 more (50 for boys and 50 for girls.) A medium high school will cost approximately 16 million dollars to build, so times that by one hundred and the cost would be one billion six hundred million. There is no way of knowing where we could get that money.

So it is obvious that several problems including classroom disruptions, lack of student confidence, and uncomfortable classroom settings, could be solved. The solution is quite simple honestly. Offer students the option of attending single sex schools.

Works Cited

1. Robert Kirschenbaum 2002-2019 National Education Association http://www.nea.org/archive/17276.htm
2. Natalie Regoli 2019 https://greengarageblog.org/author/greengarageblogadmin
3. Rhonda Rosenberg November 3, 2016 https://www.uft.org/news/teaching/how-class-disruptions-affect-achievement
4. U.S. Department of Education 08/11/2009 https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/single-sex/characteristics/index.html

Math is an essential subject for students to master in preparation for life after the classroom. The core principles of learning numbers and learning how to count are an integral part of math that many females show disinterest in at an early age, which influences math performance as time goes by (Gouwe, Mathipa, & Netshitangani, 2017). A plethora of research is available that shows that girls are less interested in math than their boy counterparts. Casad, Hale, and Wachs (2015) conducted research that determined that a child’s math anxiety is heavily attributed to parent anxieties as well as gender stereotypes. According to Wang and Degol (2017), parents who believe in math gender stereotypes think that boys have a higher math ability than girls. These same parents tend to shape the children’s math abilities by voicing their opinions about gender stereotypes. Based on prior research, there is a strong need to determine the effects of gender segregation on math achievement using research-based methods of intervention. This area of study is important because it serves as a focal point to reiterate that all students are capable of learning as long as appropriate instruction is occurring so that no students will get lost in the gap.

Statement of the Problem

According to Lauer, Esposito, and Bauer (2018), females readily admit that math reasoning causes apprehension or math anxiety. Many girls have negative attitudes when it comes to math and believe that they are not good math students. These stereotypes contribute to lowered expectations and math achievement for girls (Tichenor, Welsh, Corcoran, Piechura, & Heins, 2016). All stakeholders, including students, teachers, and parents, will benefit from this study as an attempt is made to determine the best environment to provide mathematics instruction to these students. Benefits for completing this study include determining the reasons for math anxiety, improving math achievement for students, and decreasing negative attitudes about math in general.

The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of gender segregation on math intervention, and if it improves student achievement. The study will be completed in a rural Southwest Georgia public school. This study is important in proving or disproving the need for gender segregation when it comes to teaching mathematics to students. Pre-tests and post-tests will be utilized to determine math achievement as well as observations and interviews.

Research Questions/Hypothesis

For the purpose of this study, the following question was addressed:

1. Does gender segregation, consisting of a boys-only or a girls-only classroom environment, affect student achievement in a math intervention setting?

As part of this study, the investigation included the following hypothesis:

1. Students who are taught in a segregated mathematics classroom using research-based intervention methods will perform better in math.

Definitions

• Math anxiety—“feelings of panic, uneasiness, or fright that many people encounter when deciphering math problems” (Casad, Hale, & Wachs, 2015, p. 1-2).
• Self-efficacy—“confidence in the ability to succeed” (Casad et al., 2015, p. 3).
• Gender—“state of being male, female, or neuter” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9150)
• Mathematics—“discipline that deals with the logic of shape, quantity, and arrangement” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9150)
• Foundation phase—“educators who do not specialize and have to teach all subjects offered” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9149)
• Spatial anxiety—“feelings of uneasiness motivated by activities that require spatial thinking” (Lauer, Esposito, & Bauer, 2018, p. 2126)
• Motivational framework—“child’s acceptance about the constancy of intellect and the penchant for easy tasks” (Park, Gunderson, Tsukayama, Levine, & Beilock, 2016, p. 300)
• Theory of intelligence—“Individual’s different implicit theories relating to the nature of intelligence” (Park et al., 2016, p. 300)
• STEM—“Consists of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics/statistics disciplines” (Casad et al., 2015, p. 1).

Review of the Literature

Numerous studies have attempted to show that a relationship exists between gender segregation and math achievement and have sought to understand the reasoning for this rationale. Tichenor, Welsh, Corcoran, Piechura, and Heins (2016) completed a study about the attitudes that girls have towards math in mixed-gender and single-gender classrooms. The completed research attributed the math attitudes to interactions with parents and teachers. However, Zilanawala, Martin, Noguera, and Mincy (2018), completed a similar study with African American males that analyzed math achievement trajectories in African American males. This research used standardized test scores that were converted to scale scores to compare several years of scores. The researchers also used family background data as well as school-level characteristics, such as teacher experience, attendance rates, and school climate. The existing research shared many common themes in reference to gender segregation and math achievement including math anxiety, math attitudes, and gender stereotypes. Numerous studies have been related to gender and math achievement that are filled with important findings, but the effects of gender segregation is an area that is lacking and needs to be researched to determine the complete effects.

Math Anxiety

Lauer et al. (2018) conducted research on how anxiety relates to math performance and spatial performance. The researchers found that math achievement was greatly hindered when it was coupled with a greater level of math anxiety. Students were given a questionnaire that measured the level of anxiety in math and spatial areas. The questionnaires consisted of problem-solving scenarios that had to be rated with an emoji to determine the anxiety levels. Math achievement was measured using i-Ready, a standardized math assessment. Spatial performance and reading ability were also tested. The researchers determined that all scores were positively correlated with each other. Lauer et al. (2018) noted that the findings showed that anxiety is greater in tasks that require problem-solving skills. The researchers also found no significant gender differences in math achievement, even though girls reportedly experience a higher level of anxiety in math (Lauer et al., 2018). Casad et al. (2015) also researched math anxiety along with math-gender stereotypes. These researchers sought to determine whether math anxiety and stereotypes predicted math achievement. The results indicate that a parent’s math anxiety and gender stereotypes in the classroom pose a threat to math achievement. This research indicated a need to reduce the parent’s anxieties as well as dispel gender stereotypes.

Math Attitudes

According to Casad et al. (2015), the environment and self-efficacy played a major role as a catalyst for a negative consequence related to math anxiety. The consequences included avoidance of math, less confidence, negative math attitudes, and a gender gap when it comes to STEM careers (Casad et al., 2015). According to Wang and Degol (2017), gender differences in math are minimal in early childhood and do not emerge until later years. However, the researchers noted that girls lose some ground in mathematics, as early as kindergarten. Wang and Degol (2017) also noted that culture and beliefs about male/female abilities are linked to math attitudes and stereotypes.

Gender Stereotypes

Gouwe, Mathipa, and Netshitangani (2017) conducted a qualitative study that consisted of teacher interviews that included teachers in the foundation phase. The research sought to determine why gender had an effect on math performance and why girls are disinterested in the subject. All students are taught using the same materials and standards. Another directly related research study completed by Tichenor et al. (2016) determined that girls have a negative attitude towards mathematics in general. These attitudes stemmed from gender stereotypes and a fixed mindset, which is the attitude that boys perform better in math, which in turn caused girls to lose confidence. Tichenor et al. (2016) also determined that girls should gravitate to a more growth mindset, which increases confidence, achievement, and interest in female students. The results may signal the need for single-gender classrooms to reduce gender-specific stereotypes (Tichenor et al., 2016). A weakness in this research was that participants should come from more than one school in future studies.

Teacher-Reported Instructional Practices

Unlike the prior research, Park, Gunderson, Tsukayama, Levine, and Beilock (2016), focused the research on the instructional practices of the teachers. The research sought to determine the relationship these motivational frameworks had in common with math achievement. Park et al. (2016) tested the relationship between the motivation of the student and achievement in math by determining if instructional practices predict motivational frameworks. The researchers concluded that math achievement is related to the motivational level. The theories of intelligence were also tested to determine the relationship between the teacher’s theories of intelligence and the motivational framework. Park et al. (2016) determined that instructional practices did not predict motivational frameworks, nor was it a predictor of math achievement.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the research is thorough and somewhat conclusive. However, there is a need to target the effects that separating the male and female students will have on math intervention and achievement. The existing literature has not completely researched all areas. The proposed study will determine the effects of gender segregation on math intervention success. The proposed research design will be quantitative in nature and experimental in design using single-subject research of a group of 4th-grade students.

In the proposed study, the following questions will be addressed:

1. Does math anxiety play a role in math achievement?
2. Does the presence of gender stereotypes influence attitudes in a math classroom?
3. Do students believe classrooms should be separated by gender and why?

Are single-sex schools more beneficial than co-educational schools? It is said single-sex schools give pupils a better opportunity to learn and get the best results they deserve; however, many people disagree saying coed schools give better opportunities and chances to mix with the opposite sex. What schools should parents and guardians send their children to?

Single-sex schools, otherwise known as single-sex education or gender-isolated education where the school is only made up of one gender in both the whole school and classrooms; whereas a coeducational school (coed school or mixed school) is made up of a mix of gender made up of both male and female, and they both get taught in the same classroom. In 2020 only 12% of schools in the UK were all-girls schools and only 10% for all-boys schools; this leaves the rest of the schools

Here are some reasons as to why single-sex schools may be preferred by parents. Single-sex schools are said to reduce the amount of classroom disruption as studies carried out in coed schools have shown that boys seem to be the ones disturbing the whole classroom, this results in time taken out of the lesson for the teacher to talk to the disruptive students which decrease how much learning time the pupils who want to learn to get; so, in a single-sex school pupils can get on with their work without having to show off or stand out and without being disturbed. Inexperienced, young boys and girls normally attempt to compete and challenge one another because they think it is entertaining; whereas older boys and girls may start becoming involved with each other which also creates distractions. Single-sex schools also build pupils’ confidence and courage. This is consummated by removing a large portion of the stress from: the fear of judgment, the fear of being compared to the opposite sex. In some classes girls understand to a more advanced level and get the point and enjoyment of different topics, however, in other classes, boys come through more and grasp the idea of what they are learning in school. This allows them to learn at a speed that works for them and ask questions when needed without worrying if they will be laughed at or judged.

On the other hand, coed schools allow students to have mixed-gender friendships and relationships, some people simply feel more comfortable making friends and having conversations with the opposite sex, so being in a single-sex school denies this opportunity. Being denied an opportunity to have mixed friendships and relationships can cause pupils to not make very many friends -or none at all-, and this may lead to depression and other sorts of mental health disorders. Also, going to a coed-sex school enables students to experience diversity; being in a coed school allows boys and girls to attend to what each other has to say and understand what one another outlooks are on different situations. Both of these reasons additionally remove gender stereotyping as they get to know each other, as Science Daily wrote in 2011, ‘sex segregation in schools detrimental to equality’ which may suggest single-sex schools may do more harm than good. Being in different schools and not being given very much of a chance to understand the opposite sex may build up an impossible image of how men and women are supposed to dress and act in their heads.

Many disagree, both genders learn differently, so as it’s a single-sex school the curriculum and the way they get taught can change to suit each student’s interests and needs, this way students get a better understanding of what they’re-learning. This is proven by a study carried out saying, ‘in mixed schools, 55% of pupils got five good GCSEs including English and maths, while in single-sex schools the proportion was 75%’, so this shows single-sex schools increase the number of pupils getting five good GCSEs by 20%. This also allows teachers to adapt and change the way they teach in single-sex schools. In coed schools, it is burdensome to attend to each pupil’s requirements. It is said, ‘usually boys understand more through physical activities while girls prefer interactions and discussions, so due to this teachers are able to attend to more pupils’ needs; this is accomplished by teachers being enabled to change and alter the curriculum to ways that their pupils will learn best to excel in if not most but all of their classes

But is learning all that matters throughout the school years? In single-sex schools, they get a chance to learn at a better standard, whereas in coed schools they get a chance to mix with the opposite sex naturally and not feel more worthwhile. to prepare them for the ‘real world’. By saying coed schools prepare them for the ‘real world’ this means that outside of school, men and women, boys and girls are not separated, where they work altogether and are not seen as peculiar or out of place. Mixed schools also give the opportunity to mix with the opposite sex normally and easily, to have casual conversations, and cooperate adequately avoiding all awkwardness and ignorance which may occur. Furthermore as aforementioned learning in different environments could encourage young people to feel more exceptional and more worthy compared to the opposite sex; so being in a mixed school allows students to see and experience equality in pupils and that one gender should not overpower the other.

In conclusion, single-sex schools and coeducational schools are very different in terms of what school you want your child to attend. Single-sex schools offer a more improved learning curriculum while coed schools provide pupils with real-life experiences. In my opinion, both schools are acceptable options as to which school to send your child(s) to as they both provide excellent learning opportunities, I think it just depends on which school the parent and pupil would like to enroll in.

With the development of the first industrial revolution since the eighteenth century and reached its’ peak at 1850s, the output of furniture, wallpaper, carpet, and other interior design elements and the architectural and construction materials was dramatic increased, and the production rushed into the market with a low price. At the meantime, in the traditional Lower Yangtze, Shanghai, a market town at the periphery of Suzhou city, was opening as a designated treaty port after in 1843 and Shanghai began to grow and evolved into a city with three governments – the International Settlement, the French Concession and the Chinese quarter.(Debin, Shanghai-Based Industrialization in The Early 20th Century: A Quantitative And Institutional Analysis,Pg19,2006). Many wealthy foreign businesses man and their families who come from European arrived the French Concession, Shanghai to start their transnational trade, and they introduced the newest western architectural, interior design style and education system to this oriental and young city.

The first single gender school in Shanghai since 1843

The single gender schools were created soon since the European entrepreneur and the missionary settled down in the French Concession. The main purpose and mission of establishment of those school was to cultivate outstanding students to become missionaries, and then help the spread the truth of the specific religion in Shanghai even in China. The most historic single gender school in Shanghai is one Catholic Church school named Xuhui High School, original named Collège Saint Ignace which created by the French Catholic priest Claude Gotteland in 1850 with the motto “LABORA SICVT BONVS MILES CHRISTI”. Collège Saint Ignace uses the Jesuit Association’s charter, special boys, and boarding men’s schools. Most of the students are enrolled in poor families. Because wealthy Chinese families employ tutors, boarding schools do not conform to the customs of China at that time.

Fig. 1, Picture of Collège Saint Ignace in 1880 Fig 2, Picture of the façade of Chongsi Hall in 2010)

As only preserved building of this school, Chongsi Hall was designed and under construction by the Jesuit priest Dixon in 1915 and built in 1918. It is a design of French Renaissance architecture featuring exterior red brick veneer and interior wood construction with mansard roof and French window.

Fig. 3.4, Picture of the details of Chongsi Hall

As a church school with an early education, Collège Saint Ignace has introduced a modern education system and its curriculum is relatively complete. In addition to the necessary Chinese language courses, its foreign language, music, fine arts, science, and physical education were at the forefront of the Chinese education community at the time. Collège Saint Ignace is the first school in Shanghai to teach foreign languages, also the first school to implement Western music education. This school has trained the first batch of intellectuals in modern China, many well-known or unknown educators, general teachers, scientists, engineers and technicians, translators and staff.

As the Prof. Hamlett Jane introduced the typical type and reason why the single gender school was built in the article “Schools for Boys”, the readers can have a contrast of the boys’ school in England and China.

Fig. 5, Graduation photo for the year of 1920

The European Boys’ school

In the 19th century, schools are open to middle-class children rather than only children of the upper class can be educated. In order to improve the school quality, public school made effort on their education system such as better disciplined and moral. Later, sharing and cohesive public-school culture by games and competition become a mains stream between schools. The different school also has a different experience in boys daily life. Most of the school for the boy are residential, few of day school is based on parents worry about kids bullying. Parents send their children to residential public school in order to separate them from home and feminine. Hall in school plays an important role as it is a place to get students together, the face of the school, given prizes and seen parents. Chapels are also vital in school, it attracts the different religious group and they believe that boys will easily to be inspired in the chapel. The museum is” a -center of interest and culture” in school which boys like it. During 1897, the school classroom moves away from a few big rooms to a much small room. The school pays more attention to the health and curriculum.

Dormitories have a complex relationship with the school as it is located in the external of the main school building and charged by its housemaster. But the different school has their own house system. With the demand for privacy, boys and housemaster live in a separate room. However, it causes some problems such as extreme violence. To prevent violence, the school allows boys to choose the roommate they want to live with. But it will cause a sexual issue when they choose their intimate friends as a roommate. School in different age has its own education system. No matter the boys ‘school or fine art school, they serve for upper and middle-class students. Although fine art school is open for local and foreign people, low-class people still have no opportunity to study because art is the symbol of the upper class. The growing up of the middle class in the 19th century stimulate them to shorten the distance with the upper class. they desire to be educated like the way of upper class. School to be built in order to satisfy the desire of education. the school has pay attention on the improvement of its education system to help the student build their own personality and acquire knowledge. Hall, chapel and museum for the different purpose to develop student in a different aspect. generally, schools have many different levels to separate student which is based on the pyramidal. the higher-level student study, the difficulty they are. It is a way to distinguish the elite and normal student. It is similar with the social level to separate the elite from the middle and lower class. More people have chance to study also stimulate society development, all of them are possible to contribute the society.

There are many differences of the boys’ school in China and western countries. Firstly, the students in China original come from poor family or the child lose parents rather than middle class family. And then, it is clear to understand the purpose for Chinses boy school is to help poor children to survive first and hope them can work for the spread the truth of the Jesuit, but for other countries, the jobs of schools do is to introduce to knowledge of the children from rich family to extend their abilities to make sure those children can keep creating wealthy and or keep the class of their family. Thirdly, due to the bad background of 1900 in Shanghai, students in the boys’ school did not have many choices to choose the situation of classroom or dormitory. On the other hand, the boys’ school is one type of education in China and the number of students and teaches is limited, therefore the students cannot and not be encouraged to choose their own friends.

The benefit and shortage of single gender school

In the article “Schools for Boys” by Prof. Hamlett Jane, she announced some advantage and couple disadvantage of the single gender school in 19th century. And in the article “Are single-sex schools better than co-ed schools?” which published on the website chinadaily.com, the writer discusses about how to keep the balance with the topic of gender and education. As the read can read from the article, the fact of gender in China is that “Boys and girls are socially ignorant about each other or what they like and need. As they are then encouraged to marry early in their lives, they fall for the first person to show interest in them. They have little experience of the opposite sex until after marriage.” (Are single-sex schools better than co-ed schools,2016) And the writer wrote down confidently that teachers are easily to teach same gender in one classroom and the outcomes is better than the mix-gender environment. However, many Chinese metropolises the girls in high school and junior school are stronger than the boys. And even students at a single sex school, may get better behaviors in academic studies, they lost opportunities to improve the student’s socialization with opposite sex.

The idea was pointed out by an Australian educator Sara: “Same-sex schools have their advantages but so do coed. I do believe that men and women could be taught differently and could still reach their fullest potential. However, that does not mean same-sex schools are necessary. Coed schools provide a real-world scenario of how men and women are treated the same or at least they should be. For many years now women have been speaking up and fighting to be treated the same as men, so why back down now? Coed schools will help with social, educational, and management skills, so don’t separate men and women, let them work together.” (Are single-sex schools better than co-ed schools,2016)

The single gender school revival in China

The single gender school in Shanghai did not leave a heave historical trace in Chinese education history. Most of the schools belong to the government and open to recruit the all public of the society since the People’s Republic of China establishment at 1949 because the government need space and resource to improve the education level of all citizen rather than middle class and upper. However, there are few single female schools survive, like Shanghai No.3 Girls’ High School and now the single gender school may revival in China. There is one program happening in Shanghai No. 8 Senior High School. The program gathered 60 boys enrolled in one boys-only class test which boys stay in an environment radically different from that of their peers in co-educational classes following the competition from 210 applicants.

According to a recent study by the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, the academic performance of girls has surpassed boys in nearly every subject from third to ninth grade over the last two decades.(“Single-sex schools see a revival in mainland China”2014) During the same period, girls outnumbered boys in prestigious high schools, while 80 per cent of student union presidents among national government-supported experimental high schools are girls.

And for the man only group, physical exercise is not the only feature of this programme. The students enjoy a highly diverse course of subjects, including elective courses in topics such as fire safety, information technology and repair and maintenance of computer hardware, to name a few. Highly gifted students can also be accelerated to tackle challenging subjects such as higher geometry, science and mathematics in their first year. The single gender school need more space for specific function for students to use but not every single gender school in Shanghai could provide space for students. In the 19th century, most courses for students are required and make sure them can be the top in the society, therefore the school need enough space for students to do different and various actives which depend on the student’s talent, personal character and other condition. In Shanghai, most famous school which can offer the single gender do not have extra space actually due to the over-develop of the city center. Some school use the roof area and the corridor and in class space to do exercise. It is true that the small size school is unable to explore and discover the benefit of one gender school.

To sum up, the single gender school is easy to find in Hongkong, and other western counties, but there are just couple in the mainland of China. The history of single gender in Chinese education history is undoubtedly important because the people came from the west brought the newest knowledge and skill to teach the chinses generation since 1850, and most of them become the successful workers in Modern China. Unfortunately, the history of the type of school not long enough to influence the major education in China, but there is a wish to the education in China that to improve the average education level to all students, with the time changing, girl should not be worse than boys, and the educators need to understand and explore one or more educational path to help the younger generation to be a valuable citizen for the society.

References

1. Hamlett, Jane. “Schools for Boys.” In At Home in the Institution: Material Life in Asylums, Lodging Houses and Schools in Victorian and Edwardian England, 62–87. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2015
2. Ma,Debin. “Shanghai-Based Industrialization in The Early 20th Century: A Quantitative And InstitutionalAnalysis”,19, Working Papers of the Global Economic History Network (GEHN) No. 18/06 http://www.lse.ac.uk/EconomicHistory/Assets/Documents/Research/GEHN/GEHNWP18-Ma.pdf
3. 上海“西学东渐第一校”徐汇中学迎来建校 160 周年. 新华网. 2011-11-06.
4. https://baike.baidu.com/item/徐汇公学/7210043#4
5. http://www.xjh.sh.cn/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47:xhgx&catid=11&Itemid=116&lang=zh
6. “Single-sex schools see a revival in mainland China” THE CHINA POST/ASIA NEWS NETWORK, https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/single-sex-schools-see-revival-mainland-china, 2014
7. Are single-sex schools better than co-ed schools?
8. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2016-11/26/content_27479876.htm,2016
9. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
10. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
11. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
12. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
13. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
14. https://canvas.uoregon.edu/courses/126841/files/6223042/download?wrap=1
15. http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2010-11/06/c_13594231.htm
16. http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2010-11/06/c_13594231.htm
17. https://www.asiaone.com/source/china-postasia-news-network
18. https://www.asiaone.com/source/china-postasia-news-network
19. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/single-
20. https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/single-

In tertiary education, it is uncommon to find single-sex colleges and universities, not only in America but also across the world. The education system usually sees college students as people who have gained maturity to be able to make sensible choices regarding their actions. However, single-sex education has been more prevalent in elementary and high school levels. The main reason it is prevalent in elementary and high school levels is because of the nature and extent of growth and development that children and teenagers experience at this period. In fact, Bigler and Signorella (9) points out that the power of peer pressure is no myth. Once children begin to have an interaction with others, peers will have a strong influence on gender attitudes and identities. More importantly, acceptance by peers is higher when children conform to gender stereotypes. Essentially, this motivates girls to conform to prescriptions for femininity and boys to those of masculinity (Elliot 363). Nonetheless, as children and teenagers develop their sexual consciousness, females would focus more on academics when studying in schools where there were no male students (Anfara, Vincent and Mertens 53). For instance, they would not experience the urge for romance and flirting with the opposite sex when they share classes or see them around from time to time. Schools on the other hand would have easier work focusing on education when dealing with only one gender. In retrospect, single-sex education is more beneficial for females because the school’s main focus is on the education.

From elementary school through college, in single-sex schools, heterosexual females are more likely to make academics a priority. According to various studies, the primary reason that heterosexual females are likely to focus on studies is that they do not have divided attention, particularly, the urge to impress their male counterparts in a mixed school or classroom (Anfara, Vincent and Mertens 55; Elliot 369). The females would study more without worrying about seeming like nerds. In a mixed dispensation, female students become aware of sexual attraction, and more often spend considerable time in pampering their image to entice their male colleagues. In the absence of male students, female students would be more focused on studies.

Moreover, the facts on women graduates from single-sex schools are also persuasive. When schools are in a mixed dispensation, most of them spend tremendous time in monitoring the behavior of both male and female students (Elliot 371). For example, teachers would want to be keen on how the mixed gender students relate with each other. However, in singe-sex education, the focus is only in education since teachers would not worry about children or teenagers engaging in elicit sexual behaviors (Bigler and Signorella 10). According to Hayes, Pahlke and Bigler (693), single-sex schools tend to emphasize academics significantly more than coeducational schools. They typically have same sex teachers and administrators, whereas the curriculum is more narrowly focused. Thus, such schools have several benefits for female students.

A major advantage is that girls and women feel less inhibited in the classroom and devote more time to academic work. Most female students also receive more attention and mentoring from their teachers (Hayes, Pahlke and Bigler 694). Another advantage is that single-sex schools foster social solidarity on a shared gender identity. Many societies have begun to establish women colleges because they provide a uniquely supportive environment in which women can develop their full potential, free from competition with men, for social status or for leadership (Anfara, Vincent and Mertens 56). Thus, females are likely to excel in a single-sex school setting than a mixed setting. Many female learners affirm that they feel more confident about subjects such as science and mathematics, when they attend single-sex schools. Besides, they receive more encouragement from their teachers and parents and thus, develop a stronger academic self-concept.

In single-sex education, there is evidence from few studies because little focus has been given to the subject in terms of research. Hayes, Pahlke and Bigler (697) points out that in 2005, the US Department of Education undertook a systematic review of existing research on single-sex education. After an exhaustive search of the literature that initially identified over two hundred published studies, just four qualitative studies met standard criteria of validity. The existing data on outcomes in single-sex versus coed learning environments is problematic not only because it is so meager (Hayes, Pahlke and Bigler 699). It also happens that some of the most commonly cited research studies on the subject are among the shoddiest. However, the four qualitative studies that met the standard criteria all found a significant improvement in the academic performance of students assigned to single-sex classes. For the females, and after three years of assessment, only 59% of those in mixed classes reportedly achieved a score of proficiency on state assessment exams. In contrast, 75% of females in single-sex classes did attain the proficiency grade in the assessment exams (Hayes, Pahlke and Bigler 700). However, most of the studies did not give compelling reasons for the improvement.

When it comes to education in particular, a central issue is whether sex equality requires that all students be treated alike, or whether there might be a legitimate place for recognizing gender differences in the classroom. According to Elliot (376), there is need for a girls-only environment if they were to succeed academically. Because of these calls, a considerable numbers of middle-class parents are convinced of the virtues of that their daughters would develop in a single-sex environment. In recent years, there has been considerable interest in single-sex schooling in the public sector as a means to provide more equitable education for both males and females, particularly in sex-typed fields such as mathematics. Notably, there is support for the claim that single-gender schooling in mathematics is positive for females.

Several ideologies have emerged in the 21st century on how gender sexuality, gender roles, stereotypes, and social interactions between men and women are viewed in the education system. In the US education, the essentialist theory of gender learning styles, as well as conservative and neoliberal views of education has had a significant effect on the debate on single-sex schooling (Shapka and Keating 926). The theories envisage that boys and girls’ development differ during adolescence, gender specialties and differences allow women to find solidarity among women. In 2008, Title IX rules were changed by the Bush administration to include more school freedom to try single-sex options (Elliot 377). Over the last decade, nationwide and internationally, a continued increase in the boy-girl literary gap caused schools to consider separating boys and girls in reading and writing classes. In addition, the goal of helping females to be more successful in math, science, and technology has led to more girls-only classes in these subjects in both public and private schools. More schools are employing sex segregation because of repeated incidences of conflict between boys and girls. Clearly, coeducation renders power relations, which are usually invisible. Sex segregation helps to expose these power relations because of the absence of the other gender. This helps students to relate and act differently, to become owners of their own learning.

In a counter argument, proponents of coeducation argue that single-sex education has certain disadvantages. The most significant problem they say is that women and girls who attend single-sex schools lack the opportunities that students in coeducational schools enjoy. Thus, they lack educational equality (Shapka and Keating 933). In fact, they argue that the current workplace dispensation involves an environment that is diverse in terms of gender. Training females in an exclusively women environment would deny them social skills that are needed for the interaction with their male counterparts in the workplace (Shapka and Keating 936). Failure to have this gender interaction acumen would make them perform poorly in teams of both male and female. Thus, coeducation is often presented as a universal cure for disparities in educational opportunities for women and girls.

Clearly, the purpose of single-sex education for most schools is to provide appropriate and more effective education for each sex. As observed, single-sex education benefits females significantly because of the exclusive focus on them that single-sex schools administer. The use of single-sex schooling and the rationales for it differ markedly from country to country. In some places for instance, educators consider single-sex schools necessary because of differences in biological makeup between females and males. Religion may also be a factor. Thus, Muslim countries in general favor single-sex schooling because of their cultural values and religious roots. For example, in Pakistan, schooling is sex-segregated at all levels, in conformity with Islamic theology. Although in the US, there were fewer single-sex public schools, there is considerable debate about the value of single-sex schools in educational achievement. In retrospect, single-sex schools tend to emphasize on academics significantly more than coeducational schools, and these tremendously benefits female students.

Works Cited

1. Anfara Jr, Vincent A, and Steven B. Mertens. “Do Single Sex Classes and Schools Make a Difference.” Middle School Journal, vol. 40, issue 2, Nov. 2008, p. 52-59, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00940771.2008.11461673?journalCode=umsj20
2. Bigler, Rebecca S, and Margaret L. Signorella, “Single-Sex Education: New Perspectives and Evidence on a Continuing Controversy.” Sex Roles, vol.65, iss. 9-10, 31 July 2011, doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0046x, http://nclive.org/cgi-bin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/898231300?accountid=13564
3. Eliot, Lise. ‘Single-Sex Education and the Brain.’ Sex Roles, vol. 69, no. 7-8, 2013, pp. 363-381.
4. ProQuest, http://nclive.org/cgiin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1437335216?accountid=13564, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0037-y.
5. Hayes, Amy R., Erin E. Pahlke, and Rebecca S. Bigler. ‘The Efficacy of Single-Sex Education: Testing for Selection and Peer Quality Effects.’ Sex Roles, vol. 65, no. 9-10, 2011, pp. 693-703. ProQuest, http://nclive.org/cgi-bin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/898231279?accountid=13564, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9903-2.
6. Shapka, Jennifer D., and Daniel P. Keating. ‘Effects of a Girls-Only Curriculum during Adolescence: Performance, Persistence, and Engagement in Mathematics and Science.’ American Educational Research Journal, vol. 40, no. 4, 2003, pp. 929-960. ProQuest, http://nclive.org/cgi-bin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/200410951?accountid=13564

A university did a study and determined 18 problems within today’s school system and wondered if there is a solution. Well, there is a solution and it is as simple as opening more single sex schools. Anyone that has ever attended a coed school, has, at one point, wanted to be separated from the other gender. Single sex schools can be summed up easily, ´absolutely genius´! Classroom disruptions, lack of student confidence, and uncomfortable classroom settings are all problems that could be solved by having single sex schools.

First, we all have to be honest and recognize that there are so many disruptions in a classroom. Exposure to even mild classroom disruptions lowers the academic achievement for all students in a class, including those who are highly motivated or top-performing (Rosenberg.) Teachers in single-sex high schools rated problems with student behavior as less serious than teachers in coed schools (US Department of Education.) This problem mainly affects females over males because boys tend to be more disruptive due to late maturity. Not only are they more disruptive, they also tend to be the most disruptive around girls in an attempt to impress or irritate them.

Next, comes the issue of student confidence or feeling comfortable with speaking up. Early research shows that girls reap the most benefits from being together for math and science. They feel more comfortable about their abilities without worrying about how they appear to boys, and they have more opportunity to participate in class discussions. Boys, who are typically more confident in math and science, dominate discussions, and teachers tend to call on boys more often (Kirschenbaum.) Boys also benefit from single sex schools because teachers will adopt a different and better teaching aproach to help them more. Males also may be scared to share their smarts around girls in fear of ruining their masculinity.

The last issue that could be solved is making a more comfortable classroom setting. Proponents say that usually girls prefer warmer temperatures while boys are more comfortable learning in cooler temperatures. By separating girls from boys in classrooms, school administrators can design their classrooms and set the temperature specifically for boys or girls (Regoli.) We have all been in a situation where we have had to sit next to our ex in school. This could be limited by at least half by single gender schools.

The main problems with single sex schools are that it does not prepare them for the real world, less point of views to learn from, and the cost of these new schools. In life we often have to deal with the frustrating opposite gender, so when you limit that interaction at a young age it gives them an unrealistic perception of life. Also, boys and girls are bound to have different views on classroom discussions and when you limit the kids to only hearing on point of view, it limits learning. Lastly, the cost of these new schools will be expensive. There are only 88 single sex schools in the US, so lets say we need 100 more (50 for boys and 50 for girls.) A medium high school will cost approximately 16 million dollars to build, so times that by one hundred and the cost would be one billion six hundred million. There is no way of knowing where we could get that money.

So it is obvious that several problems including classroom disruptions, lack of student confidence, and uncomfortable classroom settings, could be solved. The solution is quite simple honestly. Offer students the option of attending single sex schools.

Works Cited

1. Robert Kirschenbaum 2002-2019 National Education Association http://www.nea.org/archive/17276.htm
2. Natalie Regoli 2019 https://greengarageblog.org/author/greengarageblogadmin
3. Rhonda Rosenberg November 3, 2016 https://www.uft.org/news/teaching/how-class-disruptions-affect-achievement
4. U.S. Department of Education 08/11/2009 https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/single-sex/characteristics/index.html

Are single-sex schools more beneficial than co-educational schools? It is said single-sex schools give pupils a better opportunity to learn and get the best results they deserve; however, many people disagree saying coed schools give better opportunities and chances to mix with the opposite sex. What schools should parents and guardians send their children to?

Single-sex schools, otherwise known as single-sex education or gender-isolated education where the school is only made up of one gender in both the whole school and classrooms; whereas a coeducational school (coed school or mixed school) is made up of a mix of gender made up of both male and female, and they both get taught in the same classroom. In 2020 only 12% of schools in the UK were all-girls schools and only 10% for all-boys schools; this leaves the rest of the schools

Here are some reasons as to why single-sex schools may be preferred by parents. Single-sex schools are said to reduce the amount of classroom disruption as studies carried out in coed schools have shown that boys seem to be the ones disturbing the whole classroom, this results in time taken out of the lesson for the teacher to talk to the disruptive students which decrease how much learning time the pupils who want to learn to get; so, in a single-sex school pupils can get on with their work without having to show off or stand out and without being disturbed. Inexperienced, young boys and girls normally attempt to compete and challenge one another because they think it is entertaining; whereas older boys and girls may start becoming involved with each other which also creates distractions. Single-sex schools also build pupils’ confidence and courage. This is consummated by removing a large portion of the stress from: the fear of judgment, the fear of being compared to the opposite sex. In some classes girls understand to a more advanced level and get the point and enjoyment of different topics, however, in other classes, boys come through more and grasp the idea of what they are learning in school. This allows them to learn at a speed that works for them and ask questions when needed without worrying if they will be laughed at or judged.

On the other hand, coed schools allow students to have mixed-gender friendships and relationships, some people simply feel more comfortable making friends and having conversations with the opposite sex, so being in a single-sex school denies this opportunity. Being denied an opportunity to have mixed friendships and relationships can cause pupils to not make very many friends -or none at all-, and this may lead to depression and other sorts of mental health disorders. Also, going to a coed-sex school enables students to experience diversity; being in a coed school allows boys and girls to attend to what each other has to say and understand what one another outlooks are on different situations. Both of these reasons additionally remove gender stereotyping as they get to know each other, as Science Daily wrote in 2011, ‘sex segregation in schools detrimental to equality’ which may suggest single-sex schools may do more harm than good. Being in different schools and not being given very much of a chance to understand the opposite sex may build up an impossible image of how men and women are supposed to dress and act in their heads.

Many disagree, both genders learn differently, so as it’s a single-sex school the curriculum and the way they get taught can change to suit each student’s interests and needs, this way students get a better understanding of what they’re-learning. This is proven by a study carried out saying, ‘in mixed schools, 55% of pupils got five good GCSEs including English and maths, while in single-sex schools the proportion was 75%’, so this shows single-sex schools increase the number of pupils getting five good GCSEs by 20%. This also allows teachers to adapt and change the way they teach in single-sex schools. In coed schools, it is burdensome to attend to each pupil’s requirements. It is said, ‘usually boys understand more through physical activities while girls prefer interactions and discussions, so due to this teachers are able to attend to more pupils’ needs; this is accomplished by teachers being enabled to change and alter the curriculum to ways that their pupils will learn best to excel in if not most but all of their classes

But is learning all that matters throughout the school years? In single-sex schools, they get a chance to learn at a better standard, whereas in coed schools they get a chance to mix with the opposite sex naturally and not feel more worthwhile. to prepare them for the ‘real world’. By saying coed schools prepare them for the ‘real world’ this means that outside of school, men and women, boys and girls are not separated, where they work altogether and are not seen as peculiar or out of place. Mixed schools also give the opportunity to mix with the opposite sex normally and easily, to have casual conversations, and cooperate adequately avoiding all awkwardness and ignorance which may occur. Furthermore as aforementioned learning in different environments could encourage young people to feel more exceptional and more worthy compared to the opposite sex; so being in a mixed school allows students to see and experience equality in pupils and that one gender should not overpower the other.

In conclusion, single-sex schools and coeducational schools are very different in terms of what school you want your child to attend. Single-sex schools offer a more improved learning curriculum while coed schools provide pupils with real-life experiences. In my opinion, both schools are acceptable options as to which school to send your child(s) to as they both provide excellent learning opportunities, I think it just depends on which school the parent and pupil would like to enroll in.

Math is an essential subject for students to master in preparation for life after the classroom. The core principles of learning numbers and learning how to count are an integral part of math that many females show disinterest in at an early age, which influences math performance as time goes by (Gouwe, Mathipa, & Netshitangani, 2017). A plethora of research is available that shows that girls are less interested in math than their boy counterparts. Casad, Hale, and Wachs (2015) conducted research that determined that a child’s math anxiety is heavily attributed to parent anxieties as well as gender stereotypes. According to Wang and Degol (2017), parents who believe in math gender stereotypes think that boys have a higher math ability than girls. These same parents tend to shape the children’s math abilities by voicing their opinions about gender stereotypes. Based on prior research, there is a strong need to determine the effects of gender segregation on math achievement using research-based methods of intervention. This area of study is important because it serves as a focal point to reiterate that all students are capable of learning as long as appropriate instruction is occurring so that no students will get lost in the gap.

Statement of the Problem

According to Lauer, Esposito, and Bauer (2018), females readily admit that math reasoning causes apprehension or math anxiety. Many girls have negative attitudes when it comes to math and believe that they are not good math students. These stereotypes contribute to lowered expectations and math achievement for girls (Tichenor, Welsh, Corcoran, Piechura, & Heins, 2016). All stakeholders, including students, teachers, and parents, will benefit from this study as an attempt is made to determine the best environment to provide mathematics instruction to these students. Benefits for completing this study include determining the reasons for math anxiety, improving math achievement for students, and decreasing negative attitudes about math in general.

The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of gender segregation on math intervention, and if it improves student achievement. The study will be completed in a rural Southwest Georgia public school. This study is important in proving or disproving the need for gender segregation when it comes to teaching mathematics to students. Pre-tests and post-tests will be utilized to determine math achievement as well as observations and interviews.

Research Questions/Hypothesis

For the purpose of this study, the following question was addressed:

1. Does gender segregation, consisting of a boys-only or a girls-only classroom environment, affect student achievement in a math intervention setting?

As part of this study, the investigation included the following hypothesis:

1. Students who are taught in a segregated mathematics classroom using research-based intervention methods will perform better in math.

Definitions

• Math anxiety—“feelings of panic, uneasiness, or fright that many people encounter when deciphering math problems” (Casad, Hale, & Wachs, 2015, p. 1-2).
• Self-efficacy—“confidence in the ability to succeed” (Casad et al., 2015, p. 3).
• Gender—“state of being male, female, or neuter” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9150)
• Mathematics—“discipline that deals with the logic of shape, quantity, and arrangement” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9150)
• Foundation phase—“educators who do not specialize and have to teach all subjects offered” (Gouwe et al., 2017, p. 9149)
• Spatial anxiety—“feelings of uneasiness motivated by activities that require spatial thinking” (Lauer, Esposito, & Bauer, 2018, p. 2126)
• Motivational framework—“child’s acceptance about the constancy of intellect and the penchant for easy tasks” (Park, Gunderson, Tsukayama, Levine, & Beilock, 2016, p. 300)
• Theory of intelligence—“Individual’s different implicit theories relating to the nature of intelligence” (Park et al., 2016, p. 300)
• STEM—“Consists of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics/statistics disciplines” (Casad et al., 2015, p. 1).

Review of the Literature

Numerous studies have attempted to show that a relationship exists between gender segregation and math achievement and have sought to understand the reasoning for this rationale. Tichenor, Welsh, Corcoran, Piechura, and Heins (2016) completed a study about the attitudes that girls have towards math in mixed-gender and single-gender classrooms. The completed research attributed the math attitudes to interactions with parents and teachers. However, Zilanawala, Martin, Noguera, and Mincy (2018), completed a similar study with African American males that analyzed math achievement trajectories in African American males. This research used standardized test scores that were converted to scale scores to compare several years of scores. The researchers also used family background data as well as school-level characteristics, such as teacher experience, attendance rates, and school climate. The existing research shared many common themes in reference to gender segregation and math achievement including math anxiety, math attitudes, and gender stereotypes. Numerous studies have been related to gender and math achievement that are filled with important findings, but the effects of gender segregation is an area that is lacking and needs to be researched to determine the complete effects.

Math Anxiety

Lauer et al. (2018) conducted research on how anxiety relates to math performance and spatial performance. The researchers found that math achievement was greatly hindered when it was coupled with a greater level of math anxiety. Students were given a questionnaire that measured the level of anxiety in math and spatial areas. The questionnaires consisted of problem-solving scenarios that had to be rated with an emoji to determine the anxiety levels. Math achievement was measured using i-Ready, a standardized math assessment. Spatial performance and reading ability were also tested. The researchers determined that all scores were positively correlated with each other. Lauer et al. (2018) noted that the findings showed that anxiety is greater in tasks that require problem-solving skills. The researchers also found no significant gender differences in math achievement, even though girls reportedly experience a higher level of anxiety in math (Lauer et al., 2018). Casad et al. (2015) also researched math anxiety along with math-gender stereotypes. These researchers sought to determine whether math anxiety and stereotypes predicted math achievement. The results indicate that a parent’s math anxiety and gender stereotypes in the classroom pose a threat to math achievement. This research indicated a need to reduce the parent’s anxieties as well as dispel gender stereotypes.

Math Attitudes

According to Casad et al. (2015), the environment and self-efficacy played a major role as a catalyst for a negative consequence related to math anxiety. The consequences included avoidance of math, less confidence, negative math attitudes, and a gender gap when it comes to STEM careers (Casad et al., 2015). According to Wang and Degol (2017), gender differences in math are minimal in early childhood and do not emerge until later years. However, the researchers noted that girls lose some ground in mathematics, as early as kindergarten. Wang and Degol (2017) also noted that culture and beliefs about male/female abilities are linked to math attitudes and stereotypes.

Gender Stereotypes

Gouwe, Mathipa, and Netshitangani (2017) conducted a qualitative study that consisted of teacher interviews that included teachers in the foundation phase. The research sought to determine why gender had an effect on math performance and why girls are disinterested in the subject. All students are taught using the same materials and standards. Another directly related research study completed by Tichenor et al. (2016) determined that girls have a negative attitude towards mathematics in general. These attitudes stemmed from gender stereotypes and a fixed mindset, which is the attitude that boys perform better in math, which in turn caused girls to lose confidence. Tichenor et al. (2016) also determined that girls should gravitate to a more growth mindset, which increases confidence, achievement, and interest in female students. The results may signal the need for single-gender classrooms to reduce gender-specific stereotypes (Tichenor et al., 2016). A weakness in this research was that participants should come from more than one school in future studies.

Teacher-Reported Instructional Practices

Unlike the prior research, Park, Gunderson, Tsukayama, Levine, and Beilock (2016), focused the research on the instructional practices of the teachers. The research sought to determine the relationship these motivational frameworks had in common with math achievement. Park et al. (2016) tested the relationship between the motivation of the student and achievement in math by determining if instructional practices predict motivational frameworks. The researchers concluded that math achievement is related to the motivational level. The theories of intelligence were also tested to determine the relationship between the teacher’s theories of intelligence and the motivational framework. Park et al. (2016) determined that instructional practices did not predict motivational frameworks, nor was it a predictor of math achievement.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the research is thorough and somewhat conclusive. However, there is a need to target the effects that separating the male and female students will have on math intervention and achievement. The existing literature has not completely researched all areas. The proposed study will determine the effects of gender segregation on math intervention success. The proposed research design will be quantitative in nature and experimental in design using single-subject research of a group of 4th-grade students.

In the proposed study, the following questions will be addressed:

1. Does math anxiety play a role in math achievement?
2. Does the presence of gender stereotypes influence attitudes in a math classroom?
3. Do students believe classrooms should be separated by gender and why?