Civic Issues

Gender-based Classrooms

I’ve talked some about different potentials for individualizing education.  In general I think tailoring to a student’s personalized needs as much as possible is a good thing and is the most successful and efficient way of addressing a student’s academic problems.  But recently I saw an article about a school that was beginning to use gender-based classes to teach subjects such as math in order to address the difference between boys’ and girls’ scores on standardized evaluations.

The rationale is that boys and girls learn differently and therefore thrive more in differently structured classrooms.  Supporters of single-sex education cite findings that boys tend to be more physically active while girls show stronger verbal skills (1).  Gender-based classrooms address this issue by pairing students with teachers trained specifically to deal with these types of personalities, giving them a better opportunity of dealing with individual problems than they would have had in a more diverse classroom.   Some even claim that having boys and girls in the same classroom is too much of a distraction and that this distraction is hurting students academically.  They cite studies that indicate that single-sex classrooms have seen increases in test scores (2).

Of course, many people vehemently disagree with any sort of idea of gender-based groupings, calling single-sex classrooms violations of Title IX.  They fear the damaging effects of what they see as telling girls that they can’t compete with boys and need more help in subjects like math and science.  Critics also doubt the conclusions being drawn from emerging research, citing conflicting findings and flawed methodology,  and instead fear that splitting up boys and girls may cause them to have problems forming relationships later in life (3).

While I like the idea of teaching to more specific personality types, I don’t like the idea of making those groupings by gender alone.  There are too many exceptions and too many potentially damaging stereotypes in the making for me to really get behind this idea.  I know I probably would have resented being placed in an all-girls math class back in elementary or middle school.   However, I think personality-based classrooms, in which students were grouped by learning styles determine through some sort of personality test, could have potential.  It is likely that this kind of grouping would end up being mostly gender-based anyways, but at the very least gender would not be used as the sole determining factor.

 

 

1.http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol5/512-newvoices.aspx

2. http://www.parents-kids.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=769:gender-based-classrooms-is-this-the-answer-to-student-success-&catid=118:may-2012-issue&Itemid=126

3. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/10/17/single-sex-schools-separate-but-equal/what-our-research-on-single-sex-education-shows

7 Comments

  1. Mike Giallorenzo says:

    In terms of cost I think you would have to hire more/different teachers for it to be effective. If you are trying to separate students so as to teach them more effectively, you need to have teachers who know how to make the best of it. Otherwise you are just hurting the social lives/skills of these kids

  2. Molly Eckman says:

    That’s really similar to my idea and I think Sara Mead has it right. Supporters of gender-based classrooms see it as a sort of cure-all for education problems, when really the problem is much more complex than that.

  3. Molly Eckman says:

    I don’t see anyone ever being allowed to force students into gender-based classrooms, though the government has allowed them as long as they are strictly optional.

  4. Molly Eckman says:

    The cases I saw mostly dealt with math and science because that’s where the greatest difference between boys and girls seems to be. As to cost effectiveness, I don’t know what sort of costs this would require. However I imagine it would not be unreasonable; the teachers and students are already there and the only change really is to group them different. Schools would create groups for just as many teachers as they had.

    There’s definitely a labeling issue when it comes to any type of differentiated instruction. We dealt with it at my high school where we had “academic,” “accelerated,” and “AP” versions of most classes. While I don’t think it is a major barrier I think it’s something schools and teachers need to be aware of and monitor.

  5. Eric Luttmann says:

    I think the application of the idea to separate individuals based on gender is still young an idea. Much of what the New York Times article’s authors call “brain research” is still in its beginning stages. While there may be overall trends that tend to classify boys and girls as devleoping at different rates, every individual develops differently. Rather than using gender based classrooms, the classrooms should be structured around the level of development that a child has proven. Sara Mead from New America presents an idea to customize class rooms without regard to age and is based on personality and being developmentally similar.

    http://www.newamerica.net/blog/early-ed-watch/2008/problem-gender-based-education-2517

  6. Matt Malencia says:

    Would gender based classes be only for math, or all classes?
    Also, I think that dividing the classes up by personality or learning type could be really successful. It could go as far as to match students with a teacher who would be most successful to them. But I just have to ask how practical would this be?
    Would it be time and cost effective to give every student a personality test in order to divide them up? Secondly, would this cause problems with regard to “educational status”?
    Certain learning types may be on average smarter than others. These classrooms would immediately be considered gifted or honors in comparison to the rest of the students. Also, could some of the classes be seen as the “stupid students” and therefore be treated differently by teachers and peers. Would this division let them gain a better education than if they were grouped with the smarter students? What if there’s a couple students who just don’t fit in with the rest? Would they just be put into a small class? If so, are there enough teachers, and are they specialized enough, for a system like this?
    Finally, would this bring up problems with school funding? Schools that are much poorer would not have the money or resources for this type of program. Would it hurt them even more?

  7. Mike Giallorenzo says:

    I feel like the whole “separate but equal is never equal” thing comes to mind. If you split up different groups (especially based on a factor as disputed(you know, the whole gender equality thing) as gender) and educate them separately, I’d be afraid that both groups won’t be educated the same. Granted, this may not necessarily be a bad thing, I mean if different groups are just playing to their strengths then I think that is more to their advantage than anything, but there are definitely people who would complain that the education system would then be forcing these different categories of people into certain learning styles. Maybe if having these specialized learning environments was an option it would be ok, but if it was forced on everyone there would be repercussions.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Skip to toolbar