Girls - co-ed or single sex secondary?

[Cornygirl]

Just that really!?!

I agree with Homemama, btw - including as the owner of a 15 yo DS. Anecdotally, i also think that those of us with both boys and girls have an advantage when it comes to educating our sons about pornography and ways to treat girls - the general guideline 'Think about how you would like someone to treat your sister', though it created cries of 'Ewwwwwww' at the time, do seem to have been effective thus far.

In fact, when i see DS mooching around at music events or school events, and see how he treats the girls with exactly the same level of comradely good fellowship that he treats the boys - and talks to them in the same way as he talks to DD - I thank my lucky stars that he has been at a mixed school, and with girls in the family, who have taught him that girls are 'just normal' and can have the same interests as he does.

So? That was then, this is now. Girls who attend SS schools do not have to be socially isolated from boys. It's 6 hours of the day.

My children are at school from 8.20am until 5.30pm as well as a Sat morning.

Again, so?

River,

I think it does depend on what the girl does in the time that they are not at school - and the more time the child spends in school, the greater proportion of their life is spent in that single sex environment.

If they immediately go out to county orchestra (mixed) or Explorer Scouts (mixed) or come home to a house full of brothers and their male friends, then the SS environment of school is less important, especially if their weekends are also filled with mixed activities.

But if school is followed by coming home to a household with no siblings or just sisters, then weekends are taken up by a single sex activity such as a particular sport, then there is a level of socal isolation from boys that can be hard to deal with naturally as they get older.

As i said earlier, DD's 12 hours a week of dance in a female-dominated environment was taken into account when we chose to send her to a mixed school - because for her, a SS school + a time-consuming SS hobby, despite having a brother at home, would not have been balanced given that she has always enjoyed the straightforward companionship of boys almost more than her 'girl' friendships.

Oh, absolutely. But some posters seem to think that it's a given, that a child in a SS school will never socialise with the opposite sex. I'm waiting to hear a coherent argument that doesn't involve the past history of a school, or anything equally irrelevant, or dissing the pupils themselves.

For many girls, and indeed women, having female-only spaces to spend some time in is a very positive thing, and does not have to equate a lifelong inability to deal with males.

Interesting data showing that girls report bullying more often and more likely for non-physical forms (DoE: Bullying: Evidence from the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England 2, wave 2 Research brief November 2015)

"Overall, a higher proportion of females reported bullying than males (42% and 33%respectively). If we look at each type of bullying separately, we can see that this is true for name calling, cyberbullying and social exclusion. However, a higher proportion of males reported threats of and actual violence than females."

However, here is the crunchy data for this thread

" girls attending all-girls’ schools were less likely to be bullied than girls attending mixed schools."

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/192857/DFE-RB001.pdf

I like the data upthread that says coed until 13, then ss, then coed 6th form. Although I would say coed until 11, then ss, then coed 6th form. Think this gives the best of both worlds.

Thanks for the data.

RiverTam it's neither stupid not unpleasant, since I've made it clear earlier in the thread that I don't believe that girls do need to be isolated to achieve!

you are implying that girls who thrive in SS schools have something lacking, that those girls might not thrive in a mixed school because there's something lacking in them. And others have made the point that children don't exist in a bubble and given modern society and pressures, including hyper-genderisation and hyper-sexualisation of girls, it is not that surprising that many girls prefer a female-only environment to study in.

But do carry on with your negative assumptions. Plenty of girls and women out there to prove that they can be a very positive learning environment.

Oh rubbish. I'm responding to the assertion that girls perform better in an all female environment which is dangerously close to implying that girls can't achieve their potential elsewhere, which of course they can. It's a good marketing tool for the remaining single sex schools but it plays on fear. I don't really subscribe to this them and us view of life; it strikes me as unhelpful generally.

Again, so?

Is that all you have

goodbye

I agree that we must be very careful to not imply that girls can't equal boys in anything. However, to ignore evidence because it doesn't accord with opinion would also be unwise.

Better, I think, the understand why such evidence exists. So for example, why do girls choose physics more often and get better grades in the absence of boys? If you don't understand the cause or acknowledge the facts, how can you have a hope of determining what might be best for your child?

I'm trying to ensure the evidence is referenced, but there is a lot of it out there, so some googling on other's behalf would be useful (or even watch the youtube clip I linked). Not sure if anyone is looking at that stuff, but I'll keep posting it, as it's real and not a story about my own personal experience.

For many girls, and indeed women, having female-only spaces to spend some time in is a very positive thing , and does not have to equate a lifelong inability to deal with males.

The key statement here is 'some time' As I indicated in my previous post, my children spend 9 hours a day, 6 days a week at school....that is not some time, that is a large portion of their time.

MN164 I answered your question about whether or not my view was based purely on personal experience, which it isn't, although my personal experience does accord with what I know and have seen in an 'educational role'. There seems to be a hang up about STEM subjects on this thread. I'm sure they have their value but I'm keen to encourage boys and girls equally into whichever sphere interests them and plays to their strengths, whether that happens to be STEM or not. Two of my three DDs to have taken A2s took a STEM subject, two of my three sons did so too. In my DCs' school the teaching staff in STEM subjects are evenly split in terms of gender and the Physics team (2:1 female/male) has won an award for its success in attracting girls to their subject. I really don't see an issue. The world comprises boys and girls and I can't see the value in treating each as distinct.

So the data is to be ignored because in your experience the data doesn't correlate with it and therefore there is no issue for anyone else to be concerned about ... because in your personal experience (educational or parental) there is no issue.

Perhaps you should write to the educational research bodies I've referenced and let them know they data doesn't stack up with yours?

it is not that surprising that many girls prefer a female-only environment to study in

Again, another sweeping statement. 'Many girls" really? Where is your evidence?

Perhaps you should write to the educational research bodies I've referenced and let them know they data doesn't stack up with yours?

Mmm, Perhaps you should get some experience of single sex schools rather than re-posting what you have cut and paste from your google searches.

MN164 I don't have either the time or the interest to do so.

I have to deal with a shed load of educational data, much of which I find interesting. Because I deal with it does that make it 'personal'?! I'm fine with your data saying that girls perform better in public exams in single sex schools but I'd quarrel enormously with the validity of the sample. Anyhow, on a purely and properly personal level I've stuck to my guns, sent my DC co-ed, like what it's produced, and have sent both my daughters and sons on out into the world without a stultifying them and us approach, so it's all good. If you prefer the closeted approach, that's all good too.

I agree Buddy. I don't reckon my four DDs or their friends at co-ed would find many takers for single sex, no chance.

• However, here is the crunchy data for this thread

" girls attending all-girls’ schools were less likely to be bullied than girls attending mixed schools."

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/192857/DFE-RB001.pdf*

MN164 - LOL, had you had bothered to read the full document that you posted link to, rather than cherry picking the bits that support your argument, you would see that it is your opinions that do not stack up with the published data!

Please see below:

Boys attending all-boys’ schools were more likely to be
bullied than those attending mixed schools, but
girls attending all-girls’ schools were less likely to
be bullied than girls attending mixed schools.
These results show that characteristics of a
school can affect pupils’ risk of being bullied in
different ways. However, the level of variation in
young people’s experiences of bullying that was
attributable to differences in the schools attended
was minimal compared to differences in the
characteristics of the young people themselves

As with everything you choose according to what would suit your child best. And likewise who they choose to be friends with depends on their personality and interests as much as the school they attend.

I have a DS and a DD each at local single sex state grammars. Both also passed the entrance exam for the local mixed state grammar. Both chose to go single sex and are happy with their choices. Neither was unhappy to get rid of the opposite sex on starting secondary and both are glad they're not distracted/disrupted by them.

In the league tables despite all being selective and with the same catchment areas, the single sex schools do better academically than the mixed.

DD is in Y8 and her friends are entirely female, as they were all through mixed primary. DS is Y11 and now has a mixed friendship group through Explorers, though again it was 100% male throughout mixed primary.

The question was single sex or co-ed schools, not what type of child shall I give birth to or what kind of parent am I.

Of course, there are many factors at play of which school is only one, and perhaps a minor one.

Parenting and environment are bigger factors in general, but the question is about schools and the data pertains to that.

Glad you bothered to look at the evidence for yourself. That's what I'd encourage.

However, this whole thread feels damp given the EU result today. Bigger things to worry about for our kids now ......

Apologies, haven't read whole thread.

Richard Cairns, head of Brighton College (co-ed), has been a great supporter of co-ed schools in the press over the last year and earlier this year he said, (about girls studying in co-eds):

......"There is also rather little evidence that they do badly academically (our girls outperformed every girls’ school in England this year at A-Level)"....

"our girls outperformed every girls’ school in England this year at A-Level"

There must be some very strange stats in his year to support that statement. The DoE A-level tables shows Brighton College at #102 on the list, ranked by average point score (996.7). That is a superb result which indicates a high academic standard of intake and teaching.

However, in the list of schools with higher A level results there are many girls schools (LEH 1177, Chelmsford Girls 1150, NLC 1110, Stratford Girls 1107, Lancaster Girls 1092, Dover Girls 1087, Sounthend Girls 1077, Colchester Girls 1063, etc etc, etc, etc). Granted I haven't checked to see how many girls 6th forms accept boys now, but even when they do, it's usually only a few.

For his statement to be true but the school as a whole to be 102 on the list, boys at his school must have performed terribly badly to bring down the average. Especially as he claims his girls have done better than every girls school in England. Either his wrong or they have some serious issues with their boys results.

Have I got my guestimation wrong here?