All Boys Schooling

[Riley Jericho]

Maybe you went to an all boys school? (sorry ladies, if you missed that, but it would still be great to hear your opinion). I certainly did, and lacking any girls, they can be rather strange places!

 

A discussion coming out of the latest chapter of An English Teen, Circumcised in the USA (THE HANG) - to be found here - is single gender education a healthy thing? Does it matter?

 

If you have kids - or would like them in the future - would you entertain that type of schooling for them? Maybe you experienced an all boys education (or for that fact an all girls school) as well, and have some strong opinions about such schools.

 

Be great to hear from you!

Riley Jericho

[Nephylim]

I wouldn't ever consider sending my son to an all boy's school. IMHO it's unbalanced. The arguement for single sex schools is that it prevents distractions. I think this is bushwah. For me shool is just as much about learning to interact and handle social situations as it is about book learning. How can you learn to interact in society if you are only exposed (not like that you perve) to half of it?

[PrivateTim]

Maybe you went to an all boys school? (sorry ladies, if you missed that, but it would still be great to hear your opinion). I certainly did, and lacking any girls, they can be rather strange places!

 

A discussion coming out of the latest chapter of An English Teen, Circumcised in the USA (THE HANG) - to be found here - is single gender education a healthy thing? Does it matter?

 

If you have kids - or would like them in the future - would you entertain that type of schooling for them? Maybe you experienced an all boys education (or for that fact an all girls school) as well, and have some strong opinions about such schools.

 

Be great to hear from you!

Riley Jericho

 

I think there is a big difference between an all boys school and and all boys boarding school.

 

In general I think single gender can be highly beneficial, but like anything it has its pluses and minuses.

 

My experiences with single gender education suggest that more gets taught with less in the way of distractions. Are there social disadvantages? Perhaps, but in some of the single gender experiments in the inner cities of the U.S., it seems to have worked to the benefit of the students.

[PrivateTim]

I wouldn't ever consider sending my son to an all boy's school. IMHO it's unbalanced. The arguement for single sex schools is that it prevents distractions. I think this is bushwah. For me shool is just as much about learning to interact and handle social situations as it is about book learning. How can you learn to interact in society if you are only exposed (not like that you perve) to half of it?

 

You might find this Stetson University experiment interesting. They completed a three-year pilot project comparing single-sex classrooms with coed classrooms at a nearby neighborhood public school, Woodward Ave. For example, students in the 4th grade at Woodward were assigned either to single-sex or coed classrooms. All relevant parameters were matched: the class sizes were all the same, the demographics were the same, all teachers had the same training in what works and what doesn't work, etc. For the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, these were the results:

 

boys in coed classes: 37% scored proficient

girls in coed classes: 59% scored proficient

girls in single-sex classes: 75% scored proficient

boys in single-sex classes: 86% scored proficient.

 

These students were all learning the same curriculum in the same school. The school mainstreams students who are learning-disabled, or who have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and so on. Many of those boys who scored proficient in the all-boys classes had previously been labeled ADHD or Exceptional Student Education (and not in the good way) in coed classes.

 

I do find distraction a legitimate reason for single sex education. And boys and girls learn differently. Other studies show that boys in single sex schools are less competitive and more collaborative. They all participate more in drama and music than in coed schools.

 

There is also a recent UCLA study that shows the benefits to girls in single sex situations over coed.

Edited May 10, 2010 by PrivateTim

[Riley Jericho]

You might find this Stetson University experiment interesting. They completed a three-year pilot project comparing single-sex classrooms with coed classrooms at a nearby neighborhood public school, Woodward Ave. For example, students in the 4th grade at Woodward were assigned either to single-sex or coed classrooms. All relevant parameters were matched: the class sizes were all the same, the demographics were the same, all teachers had the same training in what works and what doesn't work, etc. For the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, these were the results:

 

boys in coed classes: 37% scored proficient

girls in coed classes: 59% scored proficient

girls in single-sex classes: 75% scored proficient

boys in single-sex classes: 86% scored proficient.

 

These students were all learning the same curriculum in the same school. The school mainstreams students who are learning-disabled, or who have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and so on. Many of those boys who scored proficient in the all-boys classes had previously been labeled ADHD or Exceptional Student Education (and not in the good way) in coed classes.

 

I do find distraction a legitimate reason for single sex education. And boys and girls learn differently. Other studies show that boys in single sex schools are less competitive and more collaborative. They all participate more in drama and music than in coed schools.

 

There is also a recent UCLA study that shows the benefits to girls in single sex situations over coed.

 

That's the question though, isn't it - and what Nephy was addressing. I think you could probably find plenty of stats to show that singles sex schools show better results - though that could well be in part that most are fee paying and can attract the best teachers. The question is not 'do they get better exam results' but more 'are they becoming balanced individuals' able to fit in and engage with the normal world.

 

ADHD? A different question - and many say that it's primarily an American phenomenum where Ritalin is dealt out to parents like sweets, to medicate kids who are the slightest bit energetic. Just my take....

 

Riley

[PrivateTim]

That's the question though, isn't it - and what Nephy was addressing. I think you could probably find plenty of stats to show that singles sex schools show better results - though that could well be in part that most are fee paying and can attract the best teachers. The question is not 'do they get better exam results' but more 'are they becoming balanced individuals' able to fit in and engage with the normal world.

 

ADHD? A different question - and many say that it's primarily an American phenomenum where Ritalin is dealt out to parents like sweets, to medicate kids who are the slightest bit energetic. Just my take....

 

Riley

 

It is a three legged stool actually and part of what Nephy said addressed two of the three legs, do students get distracted by the other sex and what are their socialization skills with the opposite sex.

 

There no no studies I know of suggesting that separating the sexes leads to serious socialization problems, there are studies that suggest students learn better, which IS the main goal of school, in single sex classrooms and or schools.

 

The third leg is that students in single sex schools flourish in areas they do not in coed schools. For girls, it is math and science in single sex schools, for boys it is the arts and music.

 

Oh and Ritalin is passe, Aderall is all the rage now.

[MikeL]

The discussion on the merits of single gender vs. coeducational schools is interesting, but, for the first time, Riley Jericho has written a chapter that I do not like. I don't think it adds anything to an otherwise exceptionally good story. I kept reading in hopes that Luke would find some way to come to Ryan's rescue...what a disappointment!

[Riley Jericho]

The discussion on the merits of single gender vs. coeducational schools is interesting, but, for the first time, Riley Jericho has written a chapter that I do not like. I don't think it adds anything to an otherwise exceptionally good story. I kept reading in hopes that Luke would find some way to come to Ryan's rescue...what a disappointment!

 

You know, I think I actually agree with Mike! I didn't like it either! (though I did say in the Chapter notes that it would be a bit feisty!)

 

It's just so much nicer in life when the White Knight turns up and rescues us from pain and disaster. But often the reality is that we end up defenseless and in pain. I struggled with this chapter, so wanting to give to Ryan and Luke the kind of moments that seemed to come so easily to Simon and Toby. Yet, even though the final moments of what happened in those washrooms hasn't yet been published (and you may still be in for a surprise or two), it's almost inevitable that Ryan is going to be damaged. How is he going to handle that? How are those that are his friends (or at least he thought they were) going to react to him? What will Luke do?

 

This is life at its worst - but it's still real, and people can, and do, get badly hurt.

 

Riley

[Riley Jericho]

It is a three legged stool actually and part of what Nephy said addressed two of the three legs, do students get distracted by the other sex and what are their socialization skills with the opposite sex.

 

There no no studies I know of suggesting that separating the sexes leads to serious socialization problems, there are studies that suggest students learn better, which IS the main goal of school, in single sex classrooms and or schools.

 

The third leg is that students in single sex schools flourish in areas they do not in coed schools. For girls, it is math and science in single sex schools, for boys it is the arts and music.

 

Oh and Ritalin is passe, Aderall is all the rage now.

 

Damn! Thanks for the heads up about Ritalin - I knew I was getting a bit excitable recently. I think my doctor is pulling a fast one on me!

 

What might be a little passe is the belief that the main purpose of schools should be to learn stuff - although it depends what you mean by learning. Even today, here in the UK, many schools have boycotted the annual SATS tests for eleven year olds. A decision taken by teachers who have know for years that kids are let down by a traditional 'learn stuff and trot it out on paper' approach to education. Rightly, they are refusing to play those games that are of no benefit to children whatsoever.

 

No, I think schools (single sex or coed) are missing the point if they think that is what they should be delivering.

Riley

[Nephylim]

I think i would be hypocritical if I complain too much about how distrubing that chapter was... given some of mine. And I don't want anyone to get the wrong impressions about...'disturbing' chapters. As Riley said real life can be disturbing. And although we have to balance gritty reality against readability it is necessary to put it in there sometimes. I know I do.

 

There are disturbing scenes in all my stories I think and I always feel... although others might not agree... that they are absolutely necessary to throw a light on a particular part of the plot, usually the things that come after. I am assuming that is the case here... although it was quite long and detailed

 

As far as schooling is concerned I remain against single sex education for the reasons already stated. To improve my son's chance of academic success I will choose a good school, support his education at home and, if necessary obtain him additional help. To improve my son's chance of becoming a well rounded and sociable man I will make sure he mingles with girls and boys on a daily basis so that he will learn, as he grows, to deal with both.

 

I wonder if there has ever been a study with regard to long term effects of single sex and opposed to mixed sex classes... for example comparing such things as successful relationships (or otherwise) , incidences of depression/suicide, sexual problems, mental health issues blah blah blah.

[PrivateTim]

The discussion on the merits of single gender vs. coeducational schools is interesting, but, for the first time, Riley Jericho has written a chapter that I do not like. I don't think it adds anything to an otherwise exceptionally good story. I kept reading in hopes that Luke would find some way to come to Ryan's rescue...what a disappointment!

 

Hmmm, how long will it take to read this story to get me up to speed.... or can you do a non-spoiler Cliff Notes (Spark notes).

[Graeme]

There no no studies I know of suggesting that separating the sexes leads to serious socialization problems, there are studies that suggest students learn better, which IS the main goal of school, in single sex classrooms and or schools.

As far as schooling is concerned I remain against single sex education for the reasons already stated. To improve my son's chance of academic success I will choose a good school, support his education at home and, if necessary obtain him additional help. To improve my son's chance of becoming a well rounded and sociable man I will make sure he mingles with girls and boys on a daily basis so that he will learn, as he grows, to deal with both.

Both myself and the best man at my wedding attended single-sex schools. We are both highly intelligent (at least I like to think so), but introverted. As a consequence, when we finished our schooling and went to university, we found ourselves significantly deficient when it came to social skills and interactions with females. We both eventually overcame that (it took me until I was in my mid twenties before I did so), but it was a distinct handicap for many, many years.

 

If a boy is extroverted, he'll find opportunities to gain the social skills outside of school. However, for introverted boys, removing daily interaction with girls can and, in the case of myself and my best man, did produce adverse social education results. Tim used the word 'serious', and I agree that the results were not serious in that we eventually overcame them, but at that stage of our lives it had a very significant effect.

 

Today, schools are more than just academic education centres. They are also social education centres. While the 'official' focus is on the academic, the schools (at least here in Australia) also recognise their social education curriculum, to the extent that we've had the school talk to us about issues that could impact on our boys' social interactions with their peers. If a school had a purely academic focus, that wouldn't be something that the school should concern themselves with.

The third leg is that students in single sex schools flourish in areas they do not in coed schools. For girls, it is math and science in single sex schools, for boys it is the arts and music.

That's not necessarily true. The arts and music programs at the school I went to (back in the 70s) were almost non-existent. It was a tech school, which mean that beside maths, science and English, it had strong metal and woodworking classes (which I hated, because I'm mechanically inept). If the school doesn't give a strong emphasis on arts and music, then a single-sex boys school isn't going to provide any significant benefits in that area.

 

However, I do agree that girls do tend to do better in maths and science if there are no boys in the class, and boys are less inhibited in arts and music if it's only guys -- but only as long as the teacher allows them to do 'guy stuff' in those classes. eg. Less Bach and more Rock

Edited May 10, 2010 by Graeme

[Skyline]

I wouldn't ever consider sending my son to an all boy's school. IMHO it's unbalanced. The arguement for single sex schools is that it prevents distractions. I think this is bushwah. For me shool is just as much about learning to interact and handle social situations as it is about book learning. How can you learn to interact in society if you are only exposed (not like that you perve) to half of it?

 

QFT

 

I have a couple friends who went to all boys schools, and are severly socially awkward around girls (or were). Moreso than typical teenager hormone horniness can account for. Like even just basic social norms for interacting with girls on the level of friendship seemed to be lost to them. Not worth it imo. If my kid starts slacking in school and his/her grades take a hit, then tv, friends, etc will be the first to go. Not people with whom they're learning.

[JamesSavik]

It has been proven that kids do better academically in single gender settings but political correctness trumps all.

 

It simply doesn't matter if it is better for the kids if it is not politically correct.

[MikeL]

Hmmm, how long will it take to read this story to get me up to speed.... or can you do a non-spoiler Cliff Notes (Spark notes).

I don't believe there are any Cliff Notes available. I highly recommend that you read the story, just be prepared for chapter 13 to be totally different from the earlier chapters. It may not affect you the way it affected me. It really is a good story.

[Graeme]

It has been proven that kids do better academically in single gender settings but political correctness trumps all.

 

It simply doesn't matter if it is better for the kids if it is not politically correct.

Actually, James, the problem is not political correctness -- it's whether this is really better for the kids.

 

I agree that what's better for the kids is what's important. For some kids, being in a single gender setting is what's best for them. But from my own experiences, and Skyline's comments above reinforce that, being in a single gender setting is definitely not what's best for some kids.

 

While academically I did really well, socially I was a complete failure. Being gay and not accepting it was part of my low self-esteem, but being unable to relate to females in a social situation didn't help at all. Other boys who had those skills enjoyed going to parties and dances. I didn't, because I just didn't know how to interact. That fed into my naturally introverted personality so that I ended up not going out, which meant I didn't make friends... of either gender. If I'd had more self-confidence in social situations, I may have been able to come out when I went to university where there was a public gay and lesbian group. Unfortunately, my education at an all-boys school left me without the social education that I needed.

 

As a rough generalisation, I'd say that for boys, being in a single-gender school would be good for the extroverts, but bad for the introverts. The introverts need to learn how to interact socially, and if they go to a single-gender school, they miss out on seeing that interaction on a daily basis -- with long term consequences to their social development, and their self-esteem.

Edited May 10, 2010 by Graeme

[JamesSavik]

I like the all male class model because it produces demonstrable results. In various pilots here in the states, boys do from 10-25% better and girls do better but not by the same margin.

 

Kids may be better socialized in co-ed situations but with half of them turning up pregnant, perhaps they are being too well socialized.

[Camilo]

My son will attend Prep (all boys school) no matter what.

 

I'm currently an senior at an all-boys Jesuit high school, and I love it. I wouldn't wish to go anywhere else. In fact, as this school year comes to an end, I'm getting sadder and sadder. I don't want to leave it, it's like a second home. I love everything about it, even the occasional ass-holes

 

This only applies to Prep which is a day school. So here I go:

 

is single gender education a healthy thing?

 

Yes. You're not gonna get sick from it. It's not gonna completely screw you up.

 

The arguement for single sex schools is that it prevents distractions. I think this is bushwah.

 

No Girls = No Girl Drama. High school girls are rather..... mean. In a way, there is a minimal feeling at Prep about "cliques". There are those who are perceived to be "popular" but that is solely on the eye of the beholder. If I want to make myself aware of who hangs out with who, who is more athletic, etc... then I'll see different groups, Yet, it's not you're whole life. You can sit where ever, and no one is going to judge you. No one cares if you're popular or not... it's not like you have to impress any girl

 

Truthfully, boys are not that dramatic. It's kinda broad for me to describe, so ask me more details questions on this topic, if you so wish.

 

 

You might find this Stetson University experiment interesting. They completed a three-year pilot project comparing single-sex classrooms with coed classrooms at a nearby neighborhood public school, Woodward Ave. For example, students in the 4th grade at Woodward were assigned either to single-sex or coed classrooms. All relevant parameters were matched: the class sizes were all the same, the demographics were the same, all teachers had the same training in what works and what doesn't work, etc. For the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, these were the results:

 

boys in coed classes: 37% scored proficient

girls in coed classes: 59% scored proficient

girls in single-sex classes: 75% scored proficient

boys in single-sex classes: 86% scored proficient.

 

These students were all learning the same curriculum in the same school. The school mainstreams students who are learning-disabled, or who have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and so on. Many of those boys who scored proficient in the all-boys classes had previously been labeled ADHD or Exceptional Student Education (and not in the good way) in coed classes.

 

I do find distraction a legitimate reason for single sex education. And boys and girls learn differently. Other studies show that boys in single sex schools are less competitive and more collaborative. They all participate more in drama and music than in coed schools.

 

There is also a recent UCLA study that shows the benefits to girls in single sex situations over coed.

 

 

I agree and disagree with this point. Yes, boys do learn better when they don't have to worry about girls thinking they are nerds or thinking they are stupid when they ask questions. However, the fact is that most all single sex schools are private and therefore have more resources (in addition to the resources of the parents) to improve test scores through methods such as tutors.

 

P.S. Private schools teachers earn an average of 10K less per year than public school teachers.

 

 

If a boy is extroverted, he'll find opportunities to gain the social skills outside of school. However, for introverted boys, removing daily interaction with girls can and, in the case of myself and my best man, did produce adverse social education results. Tim used the word 'serious', and I agree that the results were not serious in that we eventually overcame them, but at that stage of our lives it had a very significant effect.

 

Today, schools are more than just academic education centres. They are also social education centres. While the 'official' focus is on the academic, the schools (at least here in Australia) also recognise their social education curriculum, to the extent that we've had the school talk to us about issues that could impact on our boys' social interactions with their peers. If a school had a purely academic focus, that wouldn't be something that the school should concern themselves with.

 

Just because you're in an all boys school doesn't mean you are banned from girls, you will still interact with girls. Now to the latter point, "introverted boys". In a way, I believe that it is beneficial for them to attend a single sex education because this reduces their chances of getting bullied.

 

*Note: this relates to my experience at an all boys day school, not a boarding school*

 

I see a significant number of guys at Prep that would be easy targets of bullies either because of size, shape... and even perceived sexual orientation. We have a mentality of a "Brotherhood". The jocks aren't there to make you're life miserable, they kinda don't really care. They just go about their lives, laughing and being with their friends. Sometimes you get paired with them, and they are nice and normal people .

 

No-one cares what you wear of what you look like. There's a kid at school that dresses up in 19th century suits.....

 

I believe that if you want to enjoy your years of high school, Prep is a wonderful place to attend. I 98% garuntee that you will not be bullied, because as the Dean of Students says every year during orientation, "If I find out that you are bullying someone, I will personally bully you and make sure that everyone around you bullies you."

 

But alas, this is just for my school....

 

That's not necessarily true. The arts and music programs at the school I went to (back in the 70s) were almost non-existent. It was a tech school, which mean that beside maths, science and English, it had strong metal and woodworking classes (which I hated, because I'm mechanically inept). If the school doesn't give a strong emphasis on arts and music, then a single-sex boys school isn't going to provide any significant benefits in that area.

 

However, I do agree that girls do tend to do better in maths and science if there are no boys in the class, and boys are less inhibited in arts and music if it's only guys -- but only as long as the teacher allows them to do 'guy stuff' in those classes. eg. Less Bach and more Rock

 

I agree with Graeme... If you don't like arts, you don't like arts, duh. Besides, if you're holding back doing a play because girls might see you, um, girls are also in the play. There is never an all boys play, the all-boys school just gets girls from a nearby school. Same thing for girls. If a girl likes math, she's not gonna not follow it just because there are boys about; that's just plain silly

 

 

I have a couple friends who went to all boys schools, and are severly socially awkward around girls (or were). Moreso than typical teenager hormone horniness can account for. Like even just basic social norms for interacting with girls on the level of friendship seemed to be lost to them. Not worth it imo. If my kid starts slacking in school and his/her grades take a hit, then tv, friends, etc will be the first to go. Not people with whom they're learning.

 

 

Dats cuz yous playa!

 

Haha, but i agree and disagree, yes, I admit it, I don't deal well with girls. When I see a girl and i'm with friends, I start to flirt with her, even tho i'm gay..... sigh, i flirted with a Starbucks cashier on my first date with Matt :">

 

Ok, so I'll go in to my general experience about Prep. I don't have female best friends, all my friends are guys. Truthfully, were I in a co-ed high school, all my friends would be girls (that was the case for middle school, which was actually fun too, although I was in a class with only 5 boys and 24 girls, ugh, so much drama, and we had the same classes over and over again, double ugh). I'm gay, i don't crave girls or need them in my life. I go to an all boys school, my friends who are share a lot with are guys. I don't find it harming in any way. When I visited colleges, I quickly interacted with girls. But I agree with Skyline, some socially awkward guys might be..... awkward after high school *gasp*

 

We are extremely sexist at school.

 

That's normal when you put a whole bunch of guys at school. Questions like "Mr. D, is it true that women cannot think without their emotions?" and yes, I do laugh at them and think they are funny. We know we can't talk like this in the real world, it's just guys bandying. We are rude, we have no manners and sometimes say really really stupid shit. But, there is no one to judge us.

 

We grow closer to each other and most importantly, we experience personal growth (ok, that last one was just the Jesuit school motto, which leads to the next debate, religious schools or secular schools? )

 

So if anyone else has any more questions, ask me. I'll happily answer.

 

Edit: Hehe, Jesuits are not sexist, sigh, I meant the personal growth i learned in a Jesuit school

Edited May 10, 2010 by Camilo

[Graeme]

Just because you're in an all boys school doesn't mean you are banned from girls, you will still interact with girls. Now to the latter point, "introverted boys". In a way, I believe that it is beneficial for them to attend a single sex education because this reduces their chances of getting bullied.

This may be a cultural difference, because I know that while I wasn't banned from girls, I had very limited interaction with them, and that was also true for my best man (who attended a completely different school -- I didn't meet him until I went to university). Apart from school, my main other activity was basketball. While there were girls around, again I was still largely interacting with other guys (and even there, generally not on a social basis). Yes, if I was extroverted and was able to easily mix with other people, I'd have more interaction with girls, but I was shy and retiring. If I didn't have to mix with other people, I generally didn't. That meant I didn't mix with girls.

 

I don't see the logic on the bullying comment. There was bullying at the school I went to (I wasn't bullied, happily), and, if anything, I'd say that there was more risk of bullying for any guys who didn't fit the 'guy stereotype', because they couldn't escape into a non-boy environment (ie. they couldn't mix with the girls at school breaks to avoid the bullies).

 

I agree with Graeme... If you don't like arts, you don't like arts, duh. Besides, if you're holding back doing a play because girls might see you, um, girls are also in the play. There is never an all boys play, the all-boys school just gets girls from a nearby school. Same thing for girls. If a girl likes math, she's not gonna not follow it just because there are boys about; that's just plain silly

Again, this sounds like a cultural difference. I don't know of any single-gender schools here that put on plays that bring in students from other schools. What I think is more likely to happen here is that the school wouldn't put on a play at all....

 

Haha, but i agree and disagree, yes, I admit it, I don't deal well with girls. When I see a girl and i'm with friends, I start to flirt with her, even tho i'm gay..... sigh, i flirted with a Starbucks cashier on my first date with Matt :">

Which makes you sound extroverted. As I said in my post, it's the introverted guys like myself and the best man at my wedding who I think suffer more than they gain by going to a single-gender school.

[Camilo]

This may be a cultural difference, because I know that while I wasn't banned from girls, I had very limited interaction with them, and that was also true for my best man (who attended a completely different school -- I didn't meet him until I went to university). Apart from school, my main other activity was basketball. While there were girls around, again I was still largely interacting with other guys (and even there, generally not on a social basis). Yes, if I was extroverted and was able to easily mix with other people, I'd have more interaction with girls, but I was shy and retiring. If I didn't have to mix with other people, I generally didn't. That meant I didn't mix with girls.

 

I don't see the logic on the bullying comment. There was bullying at the school I went to (I wasn't bullied, happily), and, if anything, I'd say that there was more risk of bullying for any guys who didn't fit the 'guy stereotype', because they couldn't escape into a non-boy environment (ie. they couldn't mix with the girls at school breaks to avoid the bullies).

 

 

I agree with you completely on the cultural and time differences. It may very well be that the time you went to school, things were very different. In fact, plenty of my teachers (a large majority are alumni who decided they want to come back and teach) tell me that Prep used to be very different. 40 years ago, it was only priests, no female teachers. They would slap you with a metal ruler, make you do push ups, and so on if you misbehaved.

 

I'll rephrase my bullying comment. At my current school, there is a minimal amount of bullying (Personally, I haven't seen any case of it, but of course, there is. That would just be silly if I said there wasn't any). "The guy stereo type", it's there. I've seen it, but in a way, it's more prevelant in co-ed schools in which this "guy stereo type" attracts girls. In an all boys school, there is no need to maintain a "guy stereo type" to the same extent. Something I've noticed at my school is the lack of "girl talk". That is, guys seldom talk about their girlfriend and how they f**ked them, in public. There is no "how many girls have you hooked up with" and such on, which leads to this idea that other kids are "losers". Sigh, this is hard to explain . I'm saying that there is less of chance that someone is going to pick on you to appear tough to other guys or to girls. Similarly, you have a lower chance of getting picked on... cuz, well, no one really cares .

 

Trust me, with 900 guys, not everyone will fit the "guy stereo type". There will be guys who do plays, guys who sing, guys you play sports, guys who are into politics, guys who are into art. In a way, you won't feel awkward because you're the only guy on the yearbook, surrounded by girls. Guess what, they're are only boys . Actually, now that I think about it, to some extent single sex education allows guys to do the arts, without having to worry that "only girls do that" mentality.

[Graeme]

I agree with you completely on the cultural and time differences. It may very well be that the time you went to school, things were very different. In fact, plenty of my teachers (a large majority are alumni who decided they want to come back and teach) tell me that Prep used to be very different. 40 years ago, it was only priests, no female teachers. They would slap you with a metal ruler, make you do push ups, and so on if you misbehaved.

Certainly schools today are different to schools back in the 70s. However, I think it's more an American vs Australian school cultural difference. I don't know a lot about schools in the USA but I get the impression that they have a much higher focus in a student's life than they do in Australia. eg. The schools are a social hub in the USA, while they aren't in Australia. So the point I was trying to make may be more applicable in Australia than it is in the USA. That is, because Australia doesn't have a central social hub during the school years, the social interaction that does occur at the schools have a much higher importance than it does in the USA.

 

I'll rephrase my bullying comment. At my current school, there is a minimal amount of bullying (Personally, I haven't seen any case of it, but of course, there is. That would just be silly if I said there wasn't any). "The guy stereo type", it's there. I've seen it, but in a way, it's more prevelant in co-ed schools in which this "guy stereo type" attracts girls. In an all boys school, there is no need to maintain a "guy stereo type" to the same extent. Something I've noticed at my school is the lack of "girl talk". That is, guys seldom talk about their girlfriend and how they f**ked them, in public. There is no "how many girls have you hooked up with" and such on, which leads to this idea that other kids are "losers". Sigh, this is hard to explain . I'm saying that there is less of chance that someone is going to pick on you to appear tough to other guys or to girls. Similarly, you have a lower chance of getting picked on... cuz, well, no one really cares .

 

Trust me, with 900 guys, not everyone will fit the "guy stereo type". There will be guys who do plays, guys who sing, guys you play sports, guys who are into politics, guys who are into art. In a way, you won't feel awkward because you're the only guy on the yearbook, surrounded by girls. Guess what, they're are only boys . Actually, now that I think about it, to some extent single sex education allows guys to do the arts, without having to worry that "only girls do that" mentality.

Seriously, I think that is more an attribute of your school than single-gender schools. Some schools handle bullying well and some poorly. Your school sounds like they handle it well, so there is less bullying. The fact that your school is a single-gender school is probably only a minor factor in the equation.

 

I do remember that there wasn't a lot of talk about girls at the school I went to, too, and that was the same with my best man. However, there are a lot of other topics that can be used to split people into groups of 'losers' vs 'winners' -- removing girls doesn't change that very much.

 

My best man made the observation that BECAUSE there was less talk about girls at the school he went to, he learnt a lot less about them and how to interact with them. Thus, like me, he was socially stunted when it came to interacting with girls after he left school. If you like, he and I were in the beginners class on social interaction when we left school and went to university, while those who went to a co-ed school were doing graduate studies on that subject. Naturally, girls liked the guys who were graduates in social interaction much more than guys who were still learning the basics. After considering it, I had to agree with him. Academically, we were successful. Socially, we were high-school dropouts.

[PrivateTim]

That's not necessarily true. The arts and music programs at the school I went to (back in the 70s) were almost non-existent. It was a tech school, which mean that beside maths, science and English, it had strong metal and woodworking classes (which I hated, because I'm mechanically inept). If the school doesn't give a strong emphasis on arts and music, then a single-sex boys school isn't going to provide any significant benefits in that area.

 

However, I do agree that girls do tend to do better in maths and science if there are no boys in the class, and boys are less inhibited in arts and music if it's only guys -- but only as long as the teacher allows them to do 'guy stuff' in those classes. eg. Less Bach and more Rock

I was actually referring to U.S. schools only, since those are the only studies I've seen.

 

We don't really have tech schools in the U.S. any more, even though they might have the name still.

 

The majority of remaining single sex schools in the U.S. these days are mostly Catholic schools and some charter schools in the U.S. inner city.

 

There is definite political correctness going on in the U.S. when it comes to single sex education, especially in the inner cities. Several studies have shown African American boys perform much better academically, have lower dropout rates and lower deliquency rates when taught in single sex programs, but there is still resistence to expanding the programs.

 

http://www.brighterchoice.org/index.php?id=29

http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/er/fsmn_09.html

 

It is still an evolving topic.

[MikeL]

P.S. Private schools teachers earn an average of 10K less per year than public school teachers.

That's an interesting phenomenon about private schools. My wife taught in one for 20 years. Their teachers do make significantly less than public school teachers yet, with few exceptions, their students score significantly higher on every standardized test (SAT, ACT, and the NCLB nonsense). This is true of both middle class, church sponsored schools and the exclusive high society schools.

[Graeme]

I was actually referring to U.S. schools only, since those are the only studies I've seen.

I don't think there are any studies on this subject outside of the US, though it's possible there may be some in Europe. However, all the studies I've seen (not that I've gone looking) have been USA based.

 

We don't really have tech schools in the U.S. any more, even though they might have the name still.

LOL -- we don't really have tech school in Australia any more, either, though there's some talk about bringing them back. They served a purpose -- leading students towards apprenticeships if they didn't want to proceed to further education.

[Steve3]

Sorry Riley, but that chapter "The Hang" sucked. I simply do not believe "Lord of the Flies" justice would exist at a school in the States. If Ryan is worth his salt, he'll get a gun and blow Jonny's f*kin head off.

 

Respectfully,

 

Steve