|
The Reference Desk, using available evidence and research, provides quick-turnaround responses to questions submitted by education stakeholders around the Northeast and Islands Region. Every Friday, REL-NEI highlights one or two questions submitted to its Reference Desk.
Question of the Week
What Does Current Research Say About Single-Sex Education?
Over the last few months, the Reference Desk has received multiple questions about single-sex education. This week’s Digest examines recent research on single-sex schools and includes findings not only on academic outcomes, but socioemotional and developmental outcomes as well.
Question
What is the research on single-sex education models?
Research Synthesis
The Reference Desk found research suggesting that the self-selective nature of single-sex schooling makes it difficult to determine if factors related to the single-sex environment, pedagogy, and curriculum actually impact academic performance, or if effects are due to a confluence of other factors (Smithers, 2006; Mael, 2005; see below). Researchers found some evidence to suggest that single-sex academic and social environments affect the self-esteem of boys and girls in these environments; other studies conclude that single-sex environments can benefit both boys and girls, as compared to coeducational settings (Mael, 2005; see below).
Publicly Available Resources
- Single-Sex Versus Coeducational Schooling: A Systematic Review. 2005, Mael, F., Alonso, A., Gibson, D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M.; Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service, U.S. Department of Education; Doc # 2005-01; 128 pages.
From the Executive Summary: “The objective of this review is to document the outcome evidence for or against the efficacy of single-sex education as an alternative form of school organization using an unbiased, transparent, and objective selection process adapted from the standards of the Campbell Corporation and The What Works Clearinghouse to review quantitative studies.”
In the findings, the authors state that there were “a few trends apparent across all outcomes. The preponderance of studies in areas such as academic accomplishment and adaptation or socioemotional development yields results lending support to single-sex schooling. In terms of outcomes that may be of most interest to the primary stakeholders (students and their parents), such as academic achievement test scores, self-concept, and long-term indicators of success, there is a degree of support for single-sex schooling.”
The findings continue: “There is a dearth of quality studies (i.e., randomized experiments or correlational studies with adequate statistical controls) across all outcomes. This somewhat limits the arguments that can be built and extended from this review and renders it nearly impossible to conduct a meta-analysis on any outcome area. Many of the remaining studies have other flaws. Many of the studies lacked well-developed hypotheses, and the hypotheses were often not linked directly to the outcomes being studied.”
- The Paradox of Single-Sex and Co-Educational Schooling. September 2006; Smithers, A. & Robinson, P.; Buckingham, UK: Centre for Education and Employment Research, University of Buckingham; 40 pages.
From the Executive Summary: “Reviews in Australia, USA, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland and the UK have found little evidence of consistent advantages in either single-sex or co-education. It is difficult to compare like with like since in most Western countries single-sex schools are a small special group and differ in ways other than the gender of their intake. The importance of pupil ability and background makes it essential that these are taken into account in school comparisons. In the few studies where ability has been controlled for, apparent advantages to single-sex or co-education can emerge, but they are small and inconsistent. The comparisons will also have been confounded by differences in, for example, socio-economic status, ethnicity and such school factors as leadership and teacher expertise. While there are some very good girls’ schools and boys’ schools, it does not look as though they are good because they are single-sex.
“In America, against a background of co-education, it is has been found that single-sex schooling can benefit disadvantaged children. It is argued that this is not because of the gender mix per se but because it represents a pro-academic choice on the part of their parents/guardians” (p. i).
- A Study of the Effects of School Size and Single-Sex Education in English Schools. June 2004; Spielhofer, T., Benton, T., & Schagen, S.; Research Papers in Education; Vol. 19, No. 2; pp. 133–159; ERIC #EJ694984.
From the Abstract: “This paper reports on a research project which involved the use of a variety of statistical techniques, including multi-level modeling, to explore the impact of single-sex education and school size on pupils’ progress and opportunities. The analysis suggests that single-sex education is particularly beneficial to girls in comprehensive schools and to boys in selective schools. Furthermore, girls’ schools were found to counter traditional sex-stereotyping in subject choices. In terms of school size, the results show that medium-sized schools obtain slightly better results than very large or very small schools. The paper concludes by exploring alternative explanations of the identified effects.”
The Reference Desk also found this organization’s website to be helpful in learning more about single-sex education:
- National Association for Single Sex Public Education (NASSPE)
From the website: “NASSPE is a non-profit organization, dedicated to the advancement of single-sex public education for both girls and boys. [While they] do not believe that every child should be in a single-sex classroom, [they] do believe that every parent should have a choice of formats, single-sex vs. coed. … NASSPE has three major missions: (1) To provide professional development opportunities for teachers, sharing the latest research about different teaching strategies for girls and boys … (2) To serve as a resource for teachers, parents and administrators considering single-sex educational programs, [and] … (3) To provide a clearinghouse for relevant facts and information about public schools and classrooms in the United States, as well as to promulgate new research.”
Download the Full Response
If this material brings up questions of your own, please submit a new request here. If you’re interested in learning more about the Reference Desk, read about us here. And finally, share thoughts, experiences, and resources of your own by clicking on the Feedback link below.
|
|
