Reeds Cobham - is the Death of the Boys-Only Independent School is truly upon us..

[AndreaKnowsBest]

Reed’s School in Cobham has just announced (May 2026) that it will welcome girls into Year 7 from September 2027. It’s joining a long and growing list: Abingdon, RGS Guildford, Magdalen College School...

What was once a proud tradition of single-sex boys’ education now feels like it’s on life support. Seems boys’ schools are rushing to “diversify” or “future-proof” themselves by going co-ed.

Financial pressures, falling numbers in some cases, parental demand for sibling continuity, and the broader societal shift away from single-sex models seem to be the drivers. Even schools that were oversubscribed are making the move.

Meanwhile, many girls’ schools continue as single-sex safe spaces, with far less pressure to open to boys. There are still more fully girls-only independents (around 139) than boys-only ones (92), according to ISC data, and the top holdouts like some of the leading girls’ schools show no sign of changing.

Is this the inevitable end for boys-only schools outside the very elite few (Eton, Harrow, Radley etc.)? Or is something lost when we erase these environments that many argue helped boys focus, build confidence in certain subjects, and develop without the social dynamics of mixed classes during formative years?

Reed’s timing feels particularly late, as an example, announcing now for a 2027 start means the change is already upon us with little debate time. Families planning ahead for 11+ might feel blindsided, despite them proclaiming it is a return the their roots - no organisation woukd do this for purely historical reasons, finances and future proofing always pay a role - especially at seemingly short notice...

Would love to hear others’ thoughts, especially parents of boys who valued (or are losing) the single-sex option. I know at RGS who are not happy about the move, but, is co-ed always better, or are we losing something valuable for boys specifically?

So old fashioned to have single sex, surprised it’s taken this long tbh.

Falling rolls everywhere. I would imagine it’s a sensible commercial decision.

The stats show boys do better academically at mixed sex schools and girls do better at single sex.

For social outcomes mixed sex is better.

Can’t understand why you’d want to send your son to a single sex school for academic or social reasons. Both are poorer outcomes.

I went single sex for secondary & I think it was good for me.

Falling rolls are putting pressure on schools as is the cost of living.

Lots of Catholic secondary schools are still single sex

My children would have never participated in what they think are more feminine activities had they been in a mixed school and those clubs were full of girls. Also, boys have times in their lives (10? 11?) when they punch each other because they have not yet perfected the art of living together in a community. The headmaster of their school dealt with it knowing full well how to and not making them to be evil. We ended up in a boys’ school because that’s where they were accepted. It worked well in many ways. I’m talking primary, we will see how it will go in the secondary, also single sex.

Girls are more likely to be sexually harassed by boys than boys are, so it makes sense for there to be separate safe spaces for girls to learn. Not all girls get to secondary without being sexually assaulted and finding boys and men hard to be around, for example. Girls also say they get more of a childhood in single sex spaces because they aren't expected to be sexually aware for boys and they excell more in STEM and maths than they do in co-ed. Boys do worse academically in single sex environments, so it is not as popular with parents in the fee paying sector or in the state sector. With the rise in Tate and other manosphere influences more parents are keen for boys to mix with girls at an earlier age in the hope they don't get sucked into beleiving the twaddle.

I think boys schools understand boys. That’s important in my view. They are challenged to be good citizens but can also express themselves as boys. They tend to mature later than girls and of course the big hitting boys schools recruit at 13, not 11. They are therefore building on guidance started at prep schools.

I had my DDs at a girls school and they met lovely boys from single sex schools. They didn’t need boys in their lessons and boys don’t need girls in school. Neither should girls be used as a calming influence! They meet each other when ready and both are unpressurized by the opposite sex in school. That’s good for them all. Co Ed is over rated!

I think the death of boys only schools may have been exaggerated.

I think boys only schools are a bad option, however if you are to have girls only ones which seem much better, the corollary is boys only should happen.

What happens to all the girls schools if so many boys schools go co-ed? Surely some of them will have to switch to co-Ed also especially in the Guildford area now another boys school gone co ed on the scene? There won’t be enough girls to go round and where do the boys who now can’t go to RGS and Reeds go??

@LlynTegidWhy are they a bad option? Everything is geared to the boys and they aren’t the same as girls. Why can they not have a bespoke education? Why do young people have to be forced together in classrooms? I like to see schools have an ethos that is focussed on the different needs.

The problem is why would we expect parents to send their daughters to co ed for benefit of boys, if they are better off in single sex schools…..

I personally find the justification for single sex spaces for girls somewhat ironic when it comes with condemnation of certain cultures. However I do NOT believe segregation is the answer and we should fight against as I feel that the direction of travel is towards Victorian attitudes to women that boys and men are intrinsically bad and girls need to be protected from them. We do need to protect boys from toxic influences of masculinity likewise girls as well from stereotypical ideas of femininity.

Private companies are doing what they need to survive. It's not a big deal.

It’s supply and demand.
There is less demand for boys schools as the evidence is that boys do better in mixed schools.
There is more demand for girls schools as the evidence is that girls do better in single sex schools.

Boys schools won’t disappear, there will just be fewer of them as more people are following the evidence and choosing to send their boys to mixed schools.

A mixed school doesn’t have to be exactly 50/50 boys and girls.

Agreed.

Also, persuading girls to join a male heavy establishment at Reeds, and in the case of RGS an entirely male environment, as the first co-hort will be challenging.

Im from guildford (work with schools across the state sector) and the rgs are trying heavily to tell everyone that they have teachers who have taught girls before, so it will 'all be ok'. Its obviously not everyone's view, but I, for one, wouldn't want my DD to be in the outnumbered experimental first year groups.

I do think girls schools will still have a strong space in the market, its funny, as even before these announcements, girls travel past multiple good co-eds to get to the likes of GHS, Tormead, St Cats, all in Guildford, because they choose single sex. Just because RGS goes co-ed doesnt mean that choice will change and they will 'steal girls' from the girls schools.

I just think its a shame that boys are loosing their space, or an option to have their own space. But I guess thats because the writing is on the wall for boys schools, whether it be the educational outcomes, perceived benefits of being around girls (for boys), or falling roll?

@elmleemumhalliford will be the only all boys school left in the region- oh & st James boys but that attracts a certain type.

Hampton, St Paul’s & Whitgift will be the only boys schools left in central / Greater London. The move by Reeds is linking up with Feltonfleet & Ripley Court offering continued education from reception to 6th form - it’s what those prepared to pay want - mixed education without the need for moving schools.

St James is going coed from 2027 in both Hammersmith and Ashford.

Isn’t Dulwich boys?

@hockeyfunof course! Well Halliford really is only affordable/ less selective option then. I don’t agree all parents who pay want to keep their child in same school / with same cohort from 4-18…

@hnwis there is a whole market of parents who are not familiar with the U.K. Private system and find single sex education baffling and want all their children in 1 place without the need to tutor or look for other schools - in the Surrey area that demand is there.

yes Dulwich College too - I’m on the Surrey side of london.

Completely agree. It’s such a shame that choice is disappearing and much more so for boys than girls. I know people who are now discounting/ declining Reeds because of this.

Agreed- Ripley Court and Feltonfleet are not 'the same school' as Reeds, in this case, by any stretch of the imagination! Its simply a move to bolster their rolls, everyone is doing it, and the late timing by Reeds to announce this must be off the back of a poor or falling year 7 for September. Which seems to be commonplace across the industry right now - whether is be due to vat or general unaffordability / economic pressures on families.

I had heard a vicious rumour that Hampton had its eyes on Halliford though - wouldn't be surprised if it gets swallowed up soon too!

Agreed that 'some- peope like a through school choice - but Ripley Court and Feltonfleet are not 'the same school' as Reeds, in this case, by any stretch of the imagination!

Ripley Court has been falling apart (literally) for years, theres a bit missing every time I drive past it! And Felton Fleet isnt a match for Reeds at all.

They've just grabbed two nearby, likely struggling prep schools to bolster their estate and grab a few numbers, theyre not teally even close enough to be considered the 'same school'. That is reserved for schools with preps, senior and sixth on the same site under the same name.