There is a widely held assumption that children gain better results in single-sex schools, not least because male and female brains appear to be ‘wired’ differently.

Proponents of separation argue that boys respond positively to stress while girls struggle; that female hearing is superior, so girls react badly if they are shouted at; that female brains adapt to languages earlier; and that male attention spans are shorter – concluding that schools should stop being ‘gender blind’ and teach the two sexes apart.

But are single-sex classrooms really the route to better results? Educationalists, psychologists and parents remain deeply divided on the issue, as do the schools themselves. Last year, a report from the Centre for Education and Employment Research entitled The Paradox of Single-Sex and Co-Educational Schooling challenged the separatists. Reviewing a mountain of evidence from around the world, co-authors Professor Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson found little to suggest that girls and boys choose different subjects or do better in them in either single-sex or mixed schools.

They argued that there are excellent co-educational and single-sex schools, but they are not successful because they are boys-only, girls-only or mixed. Key factors are the ability and background of pupils as well as teacher quality, and segregation is not a recipe for improving educational standards per se. Moreover, Smithers and Robinson closely examined claims for mixing or separating sexes and found that the evidence is often inadequately or selectively presented. The paradox mentioned in the report’s title is that belief on the subject is so deeply held, but the evidence is so weak.

“There are no overriding advantages for single-sex schools on educational grounds,” said Smithers, director of education and employment research at the University of Buckingham. “Studies all over the world have failed to detect any major differences.”

Debate has raged Stateside, fuelled by the publication in 2005 of a book called Why Gender Matters. Now a bestseller, it was written by the US psychologist Leonard Sax – founder of the National Association for Single-Sex Public Education – who claims that girls and boys develop differently and that co-education is “a biologically disrespectful model of education”. However, consensus appears to be moving the other way in Britain. Over the last decade, 130 independent schools that were single-sex have either become co-educational or closed down. Over the past 40 years, the number of single-sex schools in the UK state sector has fallen from almost 2,500 to just over 400.

Some schools now offer single-sex lessons in an attempt to close the gender gap that has seen girls overtake boys academically, and all-girl schools tend to do well in league tables. Smithers, however, concludes that they are successful because many are grammar schools or independent. “What I don’t want to do is explain away the achievement of our great girls’ schools,” he told The Observer. “Their achievement is based on many other things.”

Heads of single-sex schools point to the stability and confidence that pupils can derive from being with their own gender, and the ability of teachers to tailor classes to suit male or female characteristics. Brenda Despontin, president of the Girls’ School Association, said: “Girls and boys develop at different stages. Single-sex schools are particularly good at finding what is special and nurturing it. I think it is difficult for girls in co-ed to achieve what they can in single-sex schools.”

Statistics would seem to bear her out. In 2005, the proportion of A grades achieved at A-level in all-girl independent schools was, on average, 10% higher than that of girls in co-educational independent schools, in all three sciences, maths, further maths, French, history and geography.

Ofsted, the schools watchdog, nailed its colours to the mast last month in a government-backed review that recommended boys should be taught separately to stop them falling further behind girls. The report, 2020 Vision, is the result of an eight-month study that calls for a radical overhaul of the education system over the next 15 years, to ensure that school-leavers in 2020 have the necessary skills.

The recommendation follows GCSE results last summer showing that boys were attaining a level of performance reached by girls seven years before. The review, chaired by Ofsted head Christine Gilbert, said that teachers should be encouraged to design classes to fit the needs of boys, with more emphasis on “competitive” lessons and the reading of non-fiction books.

“It seems clear that the education system will not achieve the next ‘step change’ in raising standards simply by doing more of the same. A new approach is required,” said the report. It went on to propose that parents should receive state funding to give their children private tuition if they are having difficulty with core subjects such as English or maths. The report also advocated high-flying pupils being allowed to sit exams early and progress to the next year if deemed ready, calling for a generation of schools run on the principle of “stage not age”.

The review was commissioned last year by the government to establish how schools can adapt to challenge the brightest pupils, yet also assist underachievers. It notes that poor standards among boys remain “extremely persistent”, adding that “pupils and their parents could be offered a range of options, some provided by the school, some by other approved providers”. These could include private tuition.

Education secretary Alan Johnson welcomed the report and said it would be examined before further policy decisions were made. “I want to remove the barriers that prevent any child from reaching their full potential,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “We need to make sure that no one is left behind at any point – from the most gifted children at the top of the class to the uninterested child at the back.”

In an attempt to help boys catch up, some schools have considered teaching models that mix single-sex with co-educational classes. At Berkhamsted Collegiate School, for example, parents are offered the “best of both worlds”, according to headteacher Priscilla Chadwick. The school is mixed from ages 3 to 11 and after 16, but pupils are taught in separate classes in between. The same teachers have to adapt their styles to rooms full of girls or boys. “It means they have to think through carefully what different approaches they can use, while the subject matter is similar,” Chadwick told The Observer.

Meanwhile, in Liverpool, male and female pupils could be taught separately in the city’s mixed secondary schools to improve academic results, following complaints from parents that some classes are dominated by boys. Governors and headteachers are considering council proposals to split pupils for certain subjects. Boys now outnumber girls in many mixed-sex classrooms because so many Liverpool girls attend single-sex schools.

“There are significantly more single-sex school places for girls than for boys, and there is greater demand for them,” councillor Paul Clein told the Liverpool Echo. “We are now getting complaints from parents of girls at mixed schools that their daughters are outnumbered by boys, and they are worried it will affect their achievement.”

Further research from the Institute of Education in London last autumn indicated that teenagers who attend single-sex schools do no better in exams than those in co-educational environments, but are twice as likely to study subjects not traditionally associated with their gender. The study found that 22% of pupils in all-girl schools gained maths, chemistry or physics A-levels – nearly twice as many as in mixed schools. Boys in single-sex schools were similarly more likely to study English and modern languages at A-level.

The findings came from a long-term study on the lives of nearly 13,000 people who were teenagers in 1974. Researchers also discovered that pupils in single-sex schools were more confident in their ability to do well in these subjects, that girls were more likely to gain qualifications in male-dominated subjects at university, and go on to earn higher salaries.

Parents will always be eager to do the best for their children, and it is clear that they, educators and legislators will continue to weigh up the pros and cons of mixed and single-sex systems. A mass of research has led to no broad consensus. While some may argue that there are innate differences between the sexes that predispose boys to fall behind at school, there is no evidence to infer that these dissimilarities mean that girls should be educated separately. Yet, while the jury is out in terms of academia, there is no doubting the sociological advantages that integrating the sexes can bring. It is important for young people to mix with all their peers, and it can be difficult for them to develop friendships with members of the opposite sex if their schooling precludes this. After all, men and women spend their lives and careers together, so the playground must surely give an indication of future realities.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend