Boys-only schools? Good or bad idea?

[Esta3GG]

I am so disappointed with the school experiences my son has had so far that I am beginning to wonder if he might be more comfortable in a more obviously male environment - particularly having access to male teachers.

I am sick to death of him being in totally female-dominated environments where any typical boyish behaviour is criticised and repressed.

Has anyone experienced something similar and found that single sex education was a good way to go?

It is odd that the school is currently 70%/30% I think that may be where the problem lies. Schools that are top heavy with boys are notoriously difficult as opposed to schools geared up entirely for boys. Why is there such an imbalance at his current school?

Our local non-selective comp is boys only & we are thinking of not sending DS there although it has a good academic record. As an only child with many male but only 1 female cousin, a single-sex education could lead to a very imbalanced social development.

The 'imbalanced social development' is so easy to avoid.

Ds1s school shared lesson with local girls school. His mates have sisters, they meet at swimming clubs or other sports clubs. Our friends have daughters. Plus, beyond mid teenage, most have access to facebook or social media.

Ds1 had a sister 10 years younger and no local family at all. As I said unthread he still had loads of female friends from 13 or so onwards. He had a girlfriend at 15 from a local school.
I really don't understand how now, as opposed to 20 years ago, this is still seen as a problem

fivecandles
I asked the same thing about the 70:30 ratio and was told that all the private schools in the region were similar. Boys are being let down so badly in the local state schools that parents are much more likely to seek private education for their sons than their daughters. That was their explanation anyway and it makes sense to me. I'm interested why schools that are top heavy with boys throw up problems. Could you elaborate?

Interesting comments Pagwatch. The school doesn't share any lessons/trips until 6th form. Friend with DD at the local girls comp says she dropped the boys she played with at primary & doesn't really mix with any boys (now age15) including those she grew up with still in same streets. She has a social /sport life I would struggle to juggle & is confident.

Take the point about mates with sisters. DS has always enjoyed playing/learning with both boys & girls so I guess I kind of would like that to continue as the norm.

I am not concerned about social development as there are so many opportunities for kids to socialise out of school. I believe children should have a social circle that extends well beyond their school anyway - otherwise school-based friendships take on disproportionate importance.

Fwiw I am not trying to convince anyone.
I just have taken no specific steps to find ways for my dc to mix with the opposite sex and yet they do. Easily.
I am just a bit perplexed when it is mentioned because it is such a non problem for us. I don't know quite how they avoid mixing now. If she is 15 does she never ho to parties or meet friends in town? Dd asked his first girlfriend out at the cinema when loads of friends met up one Saturday. Doesn't she do that? Is she not on facebook or some such?

I hope that doesn't sound inquisitorial I know tone on here can be tricky.

Dd is 9. She is friends with boys at swimming. She gets on with her school friends brothers and she always meets boys and girls when we are on holiday.
I assume she will continue to meet boys as easily as ds1 met girls

I hope she does not 'ho to parties. That sounds bad.

No ho'ing at parties to my knowledge
Yes to facebook ,twitter, meeting friends on Saturdays. I kind of get what her mum meant in that the only person I'm still in touch with from secondary school is a man (and now his family!) because we were friends from 11 onwards and never boyfriend.

My very simplistic thought is that co-ed is the norm for primary & life so why move to artificial single-sex ed for secondary. (Also DB went to boys only & frankly his bossy big sister was all that saved him socially!)

We started ds at a boys prep for various reasons. Then we moved him to mixed at 7. At 10 he begged us to move him back to single sex.
He just loathed it. He was so happy when we moved him

I could detail why but my suspicion is that some of the reasons were specific to his (actually well regarded) school and I don't want to say things that sound like stereotyping.

But given that the artificial singke sex mix has had absoloutely no down side whatsoever I am more than happy to chose that for dd too.

But the other thing of course is that the individual child and the individual school are usually more important than the type of school. Maybe it just suits my dc ?

My son did six years at mixed primary and then three at a boys' prep. He really enjoyed the more masculine ethos, and the sports were more geared to boys: rugby, football and cricket. Lots of competitions for all kinds of things, with proper winners. No more sports days spent throwing bean bags into tubs.

He's now at a paired boys' school, the pair of which is the girls' school my daughter attends. They like the social benefits of the pairing but prefer doing their own sports and having most of their lessons separately. At sixth form, some subjects are taught together and there are even more joint activities.

This thread is of interest to me as I have a 2 year old son and I have to start looking at local schools for him. He is extremely active, and has trouble listening to and following instructions. Ok, I know these things are partly attributable to his age, but I am making comparisons to other children his age, and he is at the more more extreme end for these traits. My worries are also based on having a brother who was diagnosed as ADHD and being prescribed Ritalin when at school.

How do you know if a school is good with boyish behaviour? What are the signs to look out for and the right questions to ask?

I would hate for teachers in a feminised environment to encourage a diagnosis of ADHD and drugs be prescribed so they can wash their hands of dealing with what is really just the extreme end of normal behaviour for young boys.

My ds is at a mixed prep/pre prep which is 70:30 boys to girls, but the ethos of the school is all about taking controlled risk (for instance they are encouraged to climb trees but are taught how to decide if a branch is strong enough) and loads of opportunities for outdoor play.
Theres lots of male teachers, and their games lesson (they have one pe and one games lesson a week, but 90 minutes protected play a day and above reception, everyone does at least one sports club) is divided so this term boys play rugby and girls play hockey (but both can play either in club time).

I'm really happy as ds also gets to do ballet and gymnastics, which might be more tricky at an all boys school.

No more sports days spent throwing bean bags into tubs.

We have a half-way house. The school is boys only for years 7 -11 and goes co-ed for 6th form.
This means that it is tailored towards the typical boy - sport and adventure, although there is also cookery and other arts - in lower school. They don't have much to do with the girls at that stage but they are always conscious of them being about and the girls have leadership roles eg prefect.
The boys in 6th form don't have too much trouble coping with the introduction of female classmates. Because they are used to being compeptitive, they see the girls and other new entrants as 'rivals' and, apparently, it makes them up their game.
The majority of teachers are male although there are also females, including on the SLT.

Totally relate to the OP. My experience from working in primary schools is that the extreme predominance of female staff and thus female presumptions, has a very negative effect on boys. There is undoubtedly a culture of feminine gentleness, caution and conservatism about strong physical play that suppresses boys' need to just be themselves.

Some of this is probably understandable. A lot of teachers are aware of the need to not let boys dominate in the classrom for example, so that girls get reasonable attention. Which would be OK if the boys had a fair whack at expressing that side of themselves by knocking around at lunchtime the way we used to. But they don't.

As a parent, not sure how I feel about single sex education. My own DS is quite unboyish in some ways and has always had more friends among the girls at school, so it certainly wouldn't suit him.

Spot on confidence.

A lot of this boils down to simply not understanding boys' physicality in my opionion. It seems to me that the point when perfectly normal physical play stops and bullying starts is a mystery to a vast number of (predominantly female) teachers.

Young boys (and quite a few girls too) rough and tumble - it is what they do the whole world over. They do stupid things like brandish big sticks at each other and pretend they are light sabres. That is all perfectly normal behaviour for primary age children as far as I can see it.
If children get hurt through normal play then it is very often a case of the game going too far. It doesn't mean the children in question are "naughty" or bullies.

My son was recently described as a "very physical child" the other day by a member of staff - and it was meant perjoratively with a bloody great sneer on her face. If my "very physical child" goes on to win Olympic medals for rowing I suspect she would be the first to crow about how he was once in her class.

I am so bored of reading prospectuses claiming to celebrate the individual in each child when the opposite seems to be the case. Especially when the child is male.

It depends on the school ethos and the boys that go there but yes, I would prefer single sex education for my children.

It's not just about academic achievement.
My sons say the girls from single sex schools are boy crazy to the point of absurdity (texting 30 times a day, throwing themselves at boys). I think it is important for girls and boys to see one another as normal, not exotic.

I would suggets it is your DS's school that is the issue. My DD attends a school that is 70:30 boys:girls and it is actually very physical- lots of sports, PE, team games, plenty of romps through local woodlands/parkland etc (I know as I have accompanied class)- all of which has been fantastic for my DD's development as she was very far behind in her physical development when she started there. (Ie couldn't hop, skip or jump, very low stamina etc)

Would you be happy for your son to become a primary teacher? Will you. Be encouraging him to do so? If not - you're part of the problem.

FWIW DD's school has lots of male staff too- TAs, teachers, instructors etc.

'There is undoubtedly a culture of feminine gentleness, caution and conservatism about strong physical play that suppresses boys' need to just be themselves.'

I would strongly argue that such a culture does no favours for girls either and any assumption that girls naturally fit into such stereotypes is equally damaging.

Interestingly, girls fare much better in single sex schools where, ironically, they are often freed from such stereotypes. It is much more common for girls to take and excel at subjects which are not stereotypically 'feminine' such as maths and physics in a single sex school for example.

Would you be happy for your son to become a primary teacher?

Odd question. Yes of course I would be extremely happy for my son to be a primary school teacher if that is what he wants to do with his life.
The problem of men not entering teaching is extremely complex and has a lot to do with the paedo-hysteria of recent years plus the fact that lots of blokes don't fancy the idea of working in an environment where they will be the only male.
I have a friend who trained as a primary school teacher - but as a man and muslim working in the inner city he was regarded as goldust and was fastracked away from the classroom very fast.
It could be time for some positive discrimination in primary education recruitment in order to get some balance back .

FWIW DD's school has lots of male staff too- TAs, teachers, instructors etc.
Then you are very fortunate because most schools don't. The fact that more than a quarter of English primaries have no male staff at all really is appalling.

I agree fivecandles. I was very much a tomboy. An overtly feminine ethos doesn't benefit girls like me either. I was totally free to embrace my inner tomboy in primary & middle school - we even had our own girls rubgy & football teams. That all stopped at single sex grammar school. In fact they banned us from playing football at breaks. The cretins.

I don't agree that the reason there are so few male teachers is 'paedo-hysteria' and female environment. I think men do not go into teaching nowadays because teaching has lost its cachet, and people no longer hold teachers in high regard in the main. It is seen as a low-status job akin to caring and cleaning, and therefore only women go into it. Stick around MN longer, and you'll see just how many parents consider schooling merely child-minding.

I agree most males in the classroom seem fast-tracked into headships.