Single-Sex Education: New Perspectives and Evidence on a Continuing Controversy

Abstract

The number of single-sex schools in the United States has climbed steadily in recent years, despite a lack of consensus that such schools lead to academic or psychological outcomes superior to those of coeducational schools. In this introduction to the first part of a special issue on the topic, we review the history of single-sex education in the U.S. and factors that have led to its recent rise. We then review ideological and methodological controversies in the field. Finally, we summarize the eight empirical studies that appear in the issue, highlighting the contributions of each paper to a body of work that we hope will inform educational practice and policy.

Probability Values and Human Values in Evaluating Single-Sex Education

“…Might she have fared just as well if she had attended an equally selective co-educational college? (e.g., see Bigler and Signorella 2011;Bigler and Eliot 2011). And while in the mode of thought experiments, is it possible that had Clinton encountered more opportunities to hone her skills competing against men in a coeducational college that she might later have won, rather than lost, in the coeducational world of the 2008 presidential primaries?…”

“…Now commonly known for its requirement that girls and women have equal opportunities in the domain of athletics (Solmon 2014), the scope of the law was broader than that, requiring equal opportunities in all domains at schools receiving federal funding (see Bigler and Signorella 2011;Brown 2013;Klein 2012;Salomone 2002).…”

“…Another argument, made by some feminists, emphasizes instead cumulative consequences and contemporaneous effects of gender-inequalities of power, status, opportunity, and expectations in the surrounding culture (see Bigler and Eliot 2011;Bigler and Signorella 2011;Weil 2008). Insofar as girls bear the consequences of prior or concurrent inequities (e.g., so that boys overpower class discussions or so that teachers attend more to boys than girls in the classroom or offer them different kinds of intellectual challenges, see AAUW, Educational Foundation 1995;Sadkar and Sadkar 1995), single-sex settings may be favored as a means of protecting girls from sub-optimal educational conditions.…”

“…Given that-for reasons outlined by Bigler and Signorella (2011)-the focus of much of the work in the special issue is the U.S., I focus primarily on the U.S. context as well. It is important to emphasize, however, that analyses of other geopolitical units are also critical.…”

Controlling for Prior Attainment Reduces the Positive Influence that Single-Gender Classroom Initiatives Exert on High School Students’ Scholastic Achievements

“…In attempt to reduce performance clefts, other research has moved beyond these factors to examine the direct role of the learning context (Park et al 2013;Sullivan et al 2010). Despite being met with considerable controversy (Bigler and Signorella 2011;Pahlke et al 2014;Pahlke et al 2013;Signorella and Bigler 2013), one solution that has been proposed is single-gender schooling.…”