Talk

Advanced search

Scotland's last single sex state school to admit boys

(77 Posts)
scotsheather Sun 01-Dec-19 17:32:17

Not seen a thread on this. Its been rumbling on for years but personally I think it was inevitable. I don't buy the arguments girls are making to keep it single sex but admire them for standing up for what they believe in against the majority. It is an outstanding school but there many equally good or better mixed schools in Glasgow and beyond. Is single sex schooling really needed? Is it really "unfair" on boys in the catchment area?

www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/notre-dame-high-school-boys-17329912

madeyemoodysmum Tue 03-Dec-19 23:07:58

Place marking

BigChocFrenzy Tue 03-Dec-19 23:04:15

I went to a girls grammar in England, non-religious

I'm an Aspie and I already had suffered from being bullied, beaten and racially abused by boys at primary
Even at that age, there was sexual harassment in the final 2 years.

I don't think I'd have ended up a STEM PhD if I'd gone to mixed school.
In fact I'd probably have left school at 15, which was legal then

I needed the safe place from 11-18 to develop, without harassment and with my full share of the teacher's attention

Once I was at uni, I could cope much better with boys, because we were all more grown up and not trapped togethr in classrooms all day

Girls overall do better in single sex schools
We should be increasing the number of non-religious girls' schools
I'd like girls today to have the same safe space that I had, when I needed it

Birdsfoottrefoil Tue 03-Dec-19 22:57:40

Schools are non-denominational- not Protestant

Non-denominational means they are not Methodist, presbyterian, free Kirk, Unitarian, Baptist, episcopalian, Pentecostal, Lutheran etc. Not that they are not Protestant. They certainly aren’t Coptic or Othodox!

YouSawThePlans Tue 03-Dec-19 22:53:47

We did have a thread about this when the decision was announced. I think it's ridiculous that they've decided to make it co-ed. Yet again, this isn't about campaigning for boys to have the same access. It's about taking an advantage away from girls.

It's also, as a PP admitted, about parents in the West end not wanting their boys to attend a school outwith the west end where they may have to mix with a more varied demographic.

There was no valid reason to change ND. It had excellent results. Pupils came from across the city (not just the South side - many came from the East end too). It closed the attainment gap. It encouraged girls into STEM. It provided an important option for Muslim girls.

Changing it to co-ed sends a very clear message that the convenience of middle class boys is more important than the educational attainment of girls.

I hope they launch a judicial review. The equality impact assessment was laughably poor and the timeline of the decision making process seems questionable, not to mention they ignored the results of the consultation and framed it in such a way that one of the responses contradicted the LA's education priorities so those responses could be discounted.

CareOfPunts Tue 03-Dec-19 22:52:01

Totally agree @dancemom

dancemom Tue 03-Dec-19 22:46:44

@WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign

Notre Dame doesn't just admit catholic children. There is a higher percentage of non catholic than catholics attending.

This is because girls from across the city and from areas that are historically deprived choose this school to access facilities and an education they would not receive otherwise.

But yes, let's remove this option from deprived young women to placate the affluent young men who already reside in the area and have multiple other options available to them.

CareOfPunts Tue 03-Dec-19 22:43:43

It gave Catholic girls a chance. It is grossly unfair that the state purse should pay for this.

You don’t have to be Catholic to attend ND. It has a large proportion of Muslim girls for example.

WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign Tue 03-Dec-19 22:24:12

ND gave girls from poor areas a chance

It gave Catholic girls a chance. It is grossly unfair that the state purse should pay for this.

WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign Tue 03-Dec-19 22:22:33

All schools that are not Catholic are Protestant (non-denominational). That is why Catholic schools are offered as an alternative. There are no secular state schools in Scotland

There no schools in Scotland which promote Protestant ideology in the way Catholic schools do. Schools are non-denominational- not Protestant.

The reason there are Catholic schools has nothing to do with offering an alternative to Catholic parents an alternative to (the horror of having to send their children to ) "Protestant " schools. The existence of Catholic schools was demanded as a concession by the Church for the schools being handed over to local authority control for nothing. The local authorities have long since paid that debt up by having to maintain them at the public cost.

There is no justification for the public having to pay for state Catholic education.

Velveteenfruitbowl Tue 03-Dec-19 21:57:38

@WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign so don’t send your kid to one. It’s bad enough that the state is responsible for educating 90% of the population, if you allow the state to dictate how that 90% should be educated it’s like letting the fox into the chicken coop. If parents want their children in sex segregated schooling surely that’s their choice, not yours and most certainly not the governments.

Velveteenfruitbowl Tue 03-Dec-19 21:52:26

It’s very sad that children of parents who are too poor or too uncaring to go private don’t get the option of single sex education. It was truly wonderful and empowering to go through puberty exclusively with girls who were going through exactly the same day in day out. The body acceptance and the complete freedom of an environment where there was no gender inequality has made me 100% comfortable with myself as a woman. What a shame.

SonEtLumiere Tue 03-Dec-19 21:46:39

Yes punish poverty by giving children the worst possible education.
The director of the PISA report says interesting stuff about that today.

CareOfPunts Tue 03-Dec-19 21:23:46

To remove children's access to a different school results in, frankly, shit schools in poor areas and outstanding schools in wealthier ones.

Exactly what we have up here. ND gave girls from poor areas a chance. Now it’s gone. I think it’s awful.

SonEtLumiere Tue 03-Dec-19 19:01:52

This seems to be deliberately taking access to a good school away from 50% of the future students purely because they are female

Exactly!

MitziK Tue 03-Dec-19 17:40:09

Where I live, there are both mixed and single sex Catholic Schools.

Guess which two are the highest performing ones? That's right, the single sex ones.

There are also both mixed and single sex Independent Schools.

Guess which ones are the highest performing? That's right, the single sex ones.

In the next borough along, there are both mixed and single sex State Schools.

Can you guess where I'm going with this? Yup, the highest performing ones are the single sex ones.

Catholic - well, Faith, Schools, as I've also worked in CofE and colleagues have worked in the small number of other faith schools - attract and admit all abilities and social backgrounds - the determining factor upon admission is the families' having a religious belief and, where oversubscribed, being a practising Catholic/Anglican/Hindu/Muslim/whatever.

To remove children's access to a different school results in, frankly, shit schools in poor areas and outstanding schools in wealthier ones.

This seems to be deliberately taking access to a good school away from 50% of the future students purely because they are female and they don't deserve it as much as boys.

It's no different in my mind to having two girls tie to win a competition and being told they can't both have it because a boy came 19th but he's a boy, so has to have one of the prizes.

EndoplasmicReticulum Tue 03-Dec-19 14:02:21

Not about this case directly but related I think - seems like "single sex schools" aren't going to be around much longer in any case.
www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/transgender-single-sex-schools-pupils-parents-gender-equality-a9217991.html

Sillydoggy Tue 03-Dec-19 13:22:10

With the list of issues girls face I suspect it is actually indirect discrimination to force girls to go to a mixed school.

SarahTancredi Tue 03-Dec-19 13:21:36

Girls do better in single-sex schools. And of course now that they're not actively discriminated against, girls are doing far better at all levels of education. (Girls used to out-perform boys in things like the 11+ but examining boards used to mark the girls down so as not to upset things)

I think that's the crux if the matter isnt it. I mean girls having to be marked down, girls schools being forced to admit boys, werent girls applications for med school in Japan ignored ? Even the gcse format has been changed in a way that was supposed to make it so boys could do better. Still, girls out perform boys.

I think it pisses everyone off. How dare girls come from poor areas having historically been denied an education at all and do better than boys...

thatdamnwoman Tue 03-Dec-19 13:15:20

Girls do better in single-sex schools. And of course now that they're not actively discriminated against, girls are doing far better at all levels of education. (Girls used to out-perform boys in things like the 11+ but examining boards used to mark the girls down so as not to upset things).

There's lots of evidence that when boys are out of the picture girls thrive. Put boys in the classroom and girls don't speak up and don't demonstrate how clever they are because boys don't like clever girls and so on.

How is it 'fair' to deprive ordinary girls from ordinary backgrounds (as opposed to those whose families can afford private education) the right to thrive in a single-sex school?

SarahTancredi Tue 03-Dec-19 09:54:48

So sexual harassment

Sitting In class with their rapists

Lack of stem take up.

Use of girls as behaviour management/crowd control

Being forced to pee and change san pro next to boys

The fact they do far better in single sex settings

Are not convincing arguments?

The only reason for co ed is that boys do better hmm

SonEtLumiere Tue 03-Dec-19 09:53:18

I don't think it should be an option. I'm completely unconvincing by the arguments put forward for it.

Can I just ask what you think those arguments are, (key points) just so we can have the same understanding. And what you find unconvincing about them?

Birdsfoottrefoil Tue 03-Dec-19 09:30:07

There are no "Protestant" schools in Scotland

All schools that are not Catholic are Protestant (non-denominational). That is why Catholic schools are offered as an alternative. There are no secular state schools in Scotland.

Sillydoggy Tue 03-Dec-19 09:17:45

Once again the girls lose out. Can’t they have anything to benefit them?

There is enough sexual harassment in schools to justify girl only let alone the educational benefits. I think this is such a disappointing decision. I don’t see why only girls with parents well enough off to pay for private should see the benefits of girls single sex education.

WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign Tue 03-Dec-19 09:10:21

There is no reason at all for the state not to provide sex-segregated education (non-religious) if parents want it. Enough parents do want it that it should be a state provided option

I don't think it should be an option. I'm completely unconvincing by the arguments put forward for it.

WeDieAndSeeBeautyReign Tue 03-Dec-19 09:08:33

Single sex schooling, especially secondary is very justifiable. That’s what choice means

There isn't single sex state provision in Scotland. There is some in the private sector but even there many (most? ) are co-ed.

Why? Why should there only be the option of attending Protestant schools?

What a daft comment. There are no "Protestant" schools in Scotland. Personally I would ban all religious schools- certainly in the state sector.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »