Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

1 2

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Education

Have we ever had a single-sex v. co-educational debate?

49 replies

fisil · 22/05/2004 19:23

Leaving state v. private out of it, which is better, single-sex or co-educational?

OP posts:

Report

Piffleoffagus · 22/05/2004 19:24

single sex.... will justify it if I need to later on...

Report

Cam · 22/05/2004 19:27

Single sex for girls; co-ed for boys

Report

fisil · 22/05/2004 19:28

That's what I think, Cam. But who sacrifices their daughters just so those boys can get an education?

OP posts:

Report

fisil · 22/05/2004 19:29

And yes, please do justify it Piffleofagus

OP posts:

Report

expatkat · 22/05/2004 19:30

I'm with Cam & fisil but would't be gutted if ds went to a boy's school and dd to a co-ed school.

Report

jampot · 22/05/2004 19:31

IMO co-ed. I think it's just as important for children to learn how to socialise with members of the opp sex and see them as equals at all ages. However, I see it as more important when those children are in secondary education. Great friendships can be established at school with members of the opp sex and I think it gives kids space to examine their feelings before jumping in (in the case of relationships).

Report

Piffleoffagus · 22/05/2004 19:40

am too high on lager to justify now...

Report

NomDePlume · 22/05/2004 19:40

Co-ed all the way for me. I went to co-ed comp and DH went to single sex private. Whilst I agree in theory that kids in same sex schools may be more able to concentrate (less hormonal distractions to deal with), I feel wholeheartedly that the school experience is sooooo much more than just an academic education. The social and emotional interaction between both sexes during the teenage years is very important, IMO.

Report

acnebride · 22/05/2004 19:45

i believe coed and that;s what i want for ds but both dp and i were at singlesex secondary so not sure if i can justify. I still don't have a single close male friend and dp doesn't have any close female friends either.

meant that when i went to uni, all i wanted to do was 'meet' men. what a great 3 yrs....

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 19:50

Single sex for both at secondary and mixed for primary.

Report

fisil · 22/05/2004 19:51

why hercules? You teach Y6, don't you? Do your students go onto single sex schools?

OP posts:

Report

Janh · 22/05/2004 19:59

How about co-ed schools, but single-sex lessons in things like science, where boys tend to dominate, and English, where girls do.

They could combine for things like geog.

(Wouldn't like to try timetabling it though!)

Report

JJ · 22/05/2004 20:00

Aren't there any normal schools out there anymore? (normal being that everyone can be accepted, everyone can go and it's a decent school which doesn't have some religious affilitation). Co-ed definitely. If you don't want to exclude a race or religion in education why would you want to exclude a sex?

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 20:00

I teach Secondary. Popsycal is Year 6.

I guess it's because I've taught in a girls school and now teach in a coed comp. I hated working in the girls grammer, it was just not my thing but I would rather my daughter go to a single-sex than mixed as I thought the girls were so unconcerned about looks etc unlike mixed schools. I thought it was really good how relaxed and at ease they were. It was the stuck up staff room and all the perfect behaviour that I couldnt hack.
My son is doing well in a mixed primary but he does like girls and I could see him being very easily distracted, showing off etc in a mixed secondary.
Our primary school feeds in to single sex as well.

Report

JJ · 22/05/2004 20:02

Yeah, Janh, that would have done me a shitload of good, where I was the best. Would have left me the best of the girls. Which were second to the boys.

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 20:03

Our school did a trial top class where girls where taught science separately and it was a complete nightmare. The class was unteachable as the girls were far too busy gossiping and just didnt work in our school. Their results therefore did not improve but deteriorated. The boys were far more wild without the calming influence of the girls.
My school is only selective on location and is not a church school although it does get the local vicar in from time to time to pray with the kids. Completely stupid imo and I refuse to join in with the prayer and any hymns. THe kids have no choice.

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 20:04

And my school is the best non church/private/grammer school in the borough.

Report

JJ · 22/05/2004 20:08

Did it occur to them to teach the students who excelled in science the science?

I think I'm missing something.

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 20:12

Err they were the top students..

Report

JJ · 22/05/2004 20:29

Only girls were good enough for the top class? Impressive! I would have thought a mixed class of the top boys and girls would have gotten a better score.

Report

hercules · 22/05/2004 20:31

No jj they took the top students who were normally in a mixed class and taught them separately.

Report

hmb · 22/05/2004 20:41

In all the setted classes that I teach, from y7 to y11 (in science) the top sets are dominated by girls. And in general they are a delight to teach, keen, bright, pleasent, motivated and fun....and they boys aren't so bad either

In lower sets all children do worse, concentrate less and are generaly more disruptive.

I teach in a 'middle of the road' comp.

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Email address

You've subscribed!

JJ · 22/05/2004 20:43

Why did they do that? It seems like they would lose half the input. A class at that level feeds off itself. Why wouldn't they keep the kids together?

Report

toddlerbob · 23/05/2004 01:35

We don't have single sex workplaces, tv programmes, families and social lives...so why schools?

Report

LadyMuck · 23/05/2004 09:35

Not so sure about the single-sex workplaces. Legally of course not, but in practice...dh works in a 80% male environment, with female contingent being mainly administrative staff. Plays golf with male friends, is part of a band with male friends and one female vocalist.

In practice I spend most of my days with other mums. We do socialise with other couples, but say 2 evenings a week? Even then I would tend to have girls nights out as much as couply evenings IYSWIM. The majority of our time out of our home is with members of our own sex.

Schoolwise my school was a "diamond" school - mixed for primary and 6th form but separate buildings 11-16 though on the same site so you still mixed at breaktime and for school plays, music etc. Did like that model. Am currently debating single-sex v mixed for ds at primary level. As we have several boys-only schools in the area it does mean that the "mixed" schools are biased to girls - I looked at one last week which had a class of 14 girls and 4 boys. Ds1 likes other boys, so I feel a bit uncomfortable placing him somewhere with so few boys. But with the state schools it is just the luck of the draw I guess - everything is done on sibling first, then distance, so there is no check as to the mix of the class.