Dear Miss Porter’s School Community,
The New York Times published an article yesterday which offered a summary of an upcoming Science magazine article entitled, “The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling.” A segment of the article is included below for you to gain perspective on the tone and implications of both pieces.
“Single-sex education is ineffective, misguided and may actually increase gender stereotyping, a paper to be published Friday asserts.
The report, ‘The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,’ to be published in Science magazine by eight social scientists who are founders of the nonprofit American Council for CoEducational Schooling, is likely to ignite a new round of debate and legal wrangling about the effects of single-sex education.
It asserts that ‘sex-segregated education is deeply misguided and often justified by weak, cherry-picked or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence.’
But the strongest argument against single-sex education, the article said, is that it reduces boys’ and girls’ opportunities to work together, and reinforces sex stereotypes. ‘Boys who spend more time with other boys become increasingly aggressive,’ the article said. ‘Similarly, girls who spend more time with other girls become more sex-typed.’” (NYT, 9/22/11)
Both articles may gain some traction in the days and weeks ahead. It is my goal to provide you with information to assist you in your response to inquiries on the topic. Certainly, we may all be able to speak anecdotally about the positive effect of single-sex education, but there are facts and data which support exactly what we know to be true.
It is true that there are no differences between boys and girls that affect their capacity for learning. But while their brains are not different, the ways in which boys and girls are viewed and treated are quite so. In co-educational classrooms, the risk for stereotype threat is alive and well as boys and girls consciously or subconsciously reflect the sociopolitical domain in which they live.
Single-sex schools do what co-educational environments often do not: they acknowledge gender. While this can seem a point seemingly so obvious that it is worth overlooking, it is vital. The difference a girls’ school provides a young woman is the open discussion and address of the distinct ways in which gender can affect learning as well as their social, personal, and professional experiences. This frank discussion reduces the likelihood of girls sheepishly succumbing to social expectation rather than reinforcing stereotypes. Girls who attend girls’ schools report more female role models, increased faculty interactions, and a greater focus on academic endeavors. The National Coalition of Girls’ Schools reports higher levels of academic achievement and confidence among girls at single-sex schools as compared to their co-ed peers. And, girls’ schools offer one very important outcome: the ability to evoke, encourage and establish self-agency. In girls' schools, girls are given authority to make decisions, hold power and choose their own paths. As a result, they become self-reliant as opposed to reliant on others.
Miss Porter’s School is uniquely able to provide an exemplary education to young women in the following ways:
• Our mission statement effectively establishes the expectation that girls identify and own their personal power.
• Girls are taught that leadership comes from within. Our educational philosophy promises that our students will be empowered to become “the architects of their own experience.”
• Students are expected to go from preparing to be a leader to becoming a leader. (Financial Literacy, leadership, and experiential education programs are specifically relevant.)
• Porter's graduates join a network of alumnae, our Ancients, upon graduation. These women serve as powerful role models for students and young Ancients.
If relying solely on quantitative data such as test scores in the study of single-sex vs. co-educational education, the results might be disconcerting. But, these studies do not necessarily incorporate the real value provided by schools such as ours: We teach for the overall outcome – not simply the academic component, but the comprehensive development of young women who are prepared for leadership and life. Our success is measured more fully by our students’ optimization of the opportunities we provide.
Below, I have provided a link to the article as well as some points of reference in response for your consideration as needed.
Sincerely,
Katherine G. Windsor, Ed.D
Head of Miss Porter’s School
Points of Reference:
• The claim of a lack of well-designed research showing that single-sex schooling improves students’ academic performance is refuted by US Gov Dept of Ed’s comprehensive study ( http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/single-sex/index.html) of all research done on single-sex schooling vis a vis co-ed, the final summary found the single-sex schools above the co-eds academically and socio-emotionally.
• Single-sex schools are not illegal. Title IX specifically allows single-sex public schools in grades K-12.
• The authors’ charge that evidence exists showing that single –sex schools increase gender stereotyping and legitimize institutional sexism is unsubstantiated, and no evidence is given.
• The implication that single-sex is appealing because of its novelty and innovation and therefore would not be sustainable ignores the reality that single-sex schools have been around and endured for centuries. It’s an old, not a new, model.
• The argument, that there is no more justification for sex segregation than there is for racial segregation has already been explicitly considered and firmly rejected both by the United States Supreme Court and by lower courts. To confuse the relationship and impact of racial segregation with the potential impact of separating boys and girls from each other in school defies metaphor. The former is imposed; the latter chosen. The former is separation on the basis of assigned degradation; the latter on the basis of a preferable option. The former is intended to limit reach; the later to expand reach. The former results in diminution; the latter enrichment. There is no comparison between the destruction of racism as separatism for the sake of removing people of color, and single-sex education whose goal is enlightenment and empowerment.
• A 2009, peer-reviewed study by UCLA compared a large and representative sample of girls’ school graduates to their co-ed peers. Uniquely, this study, drawing from the UCLA Higher Education Research Freshman Survey, separated single-sex schooling from other influences including socioeconomic background, parental education, and characteristics of high schools attended. In mathematics and computer skills, girls’ school alumnae rate their confidence at the start of college 10 percent higher than do their co-ed counterparts. Seventy-one percent of girls’ school graduates consider college as a prelude to graduate school, compared to 66 percent from co-ed schools. Likewise, 45 percent of women from single sex schools (compared to 41 percent of their co-ed peers) choose a college in part for its graduate school admissions record. In single-sex schools political dialogue thrives: nearly 60 percent of girls’ school graduates compared to 47.7 percent of co-ed counterparts report discussing politics in class and with friends. More than 80 percent of girls’ school graduates consider their academic performance highly successful compared to 75 percent of women graduates from co-ed schools. Nearly half of all women graduates of single sex schools (44.6 percent) rate their public speaking ability high as compared to 38.5 percent of women graduates of co-ed schools. In writing, 64.2 percent of girls’ school graduates report confidence in their writing skills, compared to 58.8 percent of women graduates of co-ed schools. Women graduates of single sex schools spend more time studying, talking with teachers outside class, tutoring peers, and studying with others: 60 percent of girls’ school graduates spent 11-plus hours a week on studies, compared to 42 percent from co-ed schools.
|