Sax (director of nasspe) summarized the report in his newsletter to paper nasspe e-subscribers (if you would like to be on our e-mailing list, please contact us i had the honor of sharing the podium last week with the lead authors of the study, michael younger. Together, we did six presentations in two days! It was a privilege to be able to discuss the study with the lead investigators face-to-face. Michael younger more than once referred to the improved performance of the boys in the single-sex foreign languages classes as "astonishing." Both researchers emphasized that it is not sufficient simply to put all the girls in one room and all the boys in another and. The full report contains many fascinating insights from students and teachers. Consider this comment from one of the boys in the single-gender class: "We don't just do war poems and Macbeth, we do wordsworth too. It's a challenge, in a way, which Mr J sets us to show the girls we're capable of doing it, but I couldn't talk about these things if there were girls there!" (p.
Researchers at Cambridge University released results of a four-year study of gender differences in education. The researchers investigated hundreds of different schools, representing a wide variety of socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds, seeking to identify trunk strategies which improved performance of both girls and boys while narrowing the gender gap between girls and boys. What makes this study really unique is that the researchers did not merely observe and document what they found; they then intervened, and attempted to graft those strategies onto other, less successful schools. A total of 50 schools were involved either as "originator schools" (schools which had successfully improved student performance while narrowing the gender gap) or "partner schools" (less successful schools onto which the "originator" strategies were grafted). One of those strategies was single-sex education. These researchers found that the single-sex classroom format was remarkably effective at boosting boys' performance particularly in English and foreign languages, as well as improving girls' performance in math and science. Here is how.
Remember, these students were all learning the same curriculum in the same school. And, this school "mainstreams" students who are learning-disabled, or who have adhd etc. Many of those boys who scored proficient in the all-boys classes had previously been labeled "adhd" or "ESE" in coed classes. 2008 update: in a recent report on nbc nightly news, professor Kathy piechura-couture of Stetson University, reported that over the four years of the pilot study, 55 of boys in the coed classrooms scored proficient on the fcat, compared with 85 of boys in the. 2013 update: at our nasspe conference in October 2013, the team of researchers from Stetson informed us that the gap between the single-gender classrooms and coed schools has narrowed. The single-gender classrooms remain high-performing, but the coed classrooms are catching. After extensive interviews with the teachers, the Stetson researchers believe that the coed classrooms are catching up because the teachers are learning how to deploy the strategies learned in the single-gender classrooms in coed classrooms. Critics of single-gender classroom formats often insist that we should ignore gender differences or work against them. But the teachers' own experience suggests just the opposite: that working in consonance with gender differences can help to boost achievement for both girls and boys, even in a coed classroom.
Why women's, brains, are, better, than, men's At Multitasking
On the contrary: some public schools which have adopted single-sex classrooms, without appropriate preparation, have experienced bad outcomes. Leonard Sax, executive director of nasspe, made this point back in 2005 in a commentary for Education week entitled "the Promise and peril of Single-sex Public Education". The single-sex format creates opportunities that don't exist in the coed classroom. Teachers can employ strategies essay in the all-girls classroom, and in the all-boys classroom, which don't work as well (or don't work at all) in the coed classroom. If teachers have appropriate training and professional development, then great things can happen, and often do happen. On this page you can learn about the experience of schools such as woodward avenue elementary in Deland, Florida; Foley intermediate in Foley, alabama; Jefferson Middle School in Springfield, Illinois; the cunningham School for Excellence in Waterloo, iowa; and many other schools which have seen.
But those schools did much more than simply put girls in one room and boys in another. In each of the schools just mentioned, teachers received training from nasspe in practical gender-specific classroom strategies and best practices for the gender-separate classroom. For more information about nasspe-sponsored professional development, please contact. Researchers at Stetson University in Florida completed a three-year pilot project comparing single-sex classrooms with coed classrooms at woodward avenue elementary School, a nearby neighborhood public school. 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. On the fcat (Florida comprehensive assessment Test here were the results: Percentage of students scoring proficient on the fcat 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:.
The full text of this article is now available online. It was published in October 2012 by the journal. This article is important. As the authors observe, this study is the first large-scale study of students randomly assigned to single-gender and coed schools. Our only concern with the article is with its underlying premise: namely, that either single-gender or coed must be "best.". We believe that premise is fundamentally mistaken.
The single-gender format is better for some students, and coed is better for others, as we stress on our new web site, the national Association for Choice in Education. (In november 2011, we changed the name "nasspe" to nace, the national Association for Choice in Education, for reasons explained at the new web site.). The all-girls format can greatly enhance the engagement of girls in physics. That reality was demonstrated most dramatically by the research of Bettina hannover and Ursula kessels. They randomly assigned 401 8th-graders either to single-gender physics class or to coed physics class, for one school year. At the end of the year, the girls who had been randomly assigned to the all-girls classroom were more engaged in physics and less likely to agree with statements such as "physics is for boys.". Girls who had been randomly assigned to coed physics class were more likely to agree that "physics is for boys." The article is titled "When being a girl matters less: accessibility of gender-related self-knowledge in single-sex and coeducational classes and its impact on students' physics-related. First point to remember, when you consider evidence regarding the effectiveness of gender-separate classrooms: Simply putting girls in one room, and boys in another, is no guarantee of anything good happening.
Two fake, brains, better, than
The scholars from Penn recognized that the random nature of the assignment creates the opportunity to compare single-gender schools with coed schools, without the usual confounding variables which would accompany any attempt at a similar comparison among North American schools. All the schools in the study are publicly-funded; none of them charges any fees or tuition. The researchers found no differences between the single-gender and the coed schools in terms of teacher quality or in teacher training. Class sizes in the boys' schools were no different than in the typical coed school, and class sizes were actually slightly larger in girls' schools than in the typical coed school. There were no differences in socioeconomic background or prior academic achievement between students attending single-gender schools and those attending coed schools. What were the results? Girls attending girls' schools were significantly more likely to attend a 4-year college compared with girls attending coed schools (Cohen's.5, p.8, p, our analyses show that single-sex schools are causally linked with both college entrance exam scores and college-attendance rates for. Attending all-boys schools or all-girls schools, rather than attending coeducational schools, is significantly associated with higher average scores on Korean and English test scores. Compared with coeducational schools, single-sex schools have a higher percentage of graduates who moved on to four-year resume colleges.
Any such study would be illegal in the United States; in the United States, federal statute 34 cfr 106.34 requires that any assignment to a single-gender classroom or school must be completely voluntary. In the first study, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania traveled to seoul south Korea, because in seoul, students are randomly assigned either to single-gender or to coed high schools. The assignment is truly random, and compulsory. Students cannot adha "opt out" of either the single-gender format or the coed format. This policy of random assignment was instituted in 1974 specifically to prevent clustering of students from particular backgrounds at particular schools. In recent decades, many korean school districts have loosened the policy and they now allow parents to express preferences or to "opt out" of particular schools. But not in seoul. In seoul, it's still a true random assignment with no opt-out.
shown that access to green space soothes frayed nerves and improves well-being. In 2009 Essex University scientists showed that as little as five minutes in a green space cut stress. Other studies have shown that those with access to countryside are less likely to have heart disease or strokes. Psychologists have argued that millions of years of evolution means the human brain has not developed to cope with life surrounded by thousands of strangers. Let's begin with two recent studies in which students were randomly assigned either to single-gender or coed classrooms, with no opt-out. We are aware of no other studies in which students were randomly assigned either to single-gender or coed classrooms, with no parental opt-out allowed.
Dr Jens Pruessner of the douglas Mental health University Institute in quebec, who helped carry out the study, said: Previous findings have shown that the risk for anxiety disorders is 21 per cent higher for people from the city, who also have a 39 per. In addition, the incidence of schizophrenia is almost doubled for individuals born and brought up in cities. These values are a cause for concern. Dr Pruessner and colleagues from the Univerity of heidleberg in Germany monitored the brain activity of adult volunteers while they carried out mental arithmetic puzzles under time pressure. The functional magnetic resonance imaging scans revealed that the brains of those living in cities reacted differently to stress, the researchers report in the journal Nature. Rat race: City life writing affects the region of the brain which controls stress, according to research. The region of the brain called the amygdala involved in mood and emotion was more active among the volunteers raised in cities, they found. And those with an urban upbringing had a more active cingulate cortex a region involved in regulating stress while carrying out the task.
Cro magnon skull shows that our brains have shrunk
A rural life is better: living in a concrete jungle is stressful and make you vulnerable to depression. Scientists have confirmed what every urbanite has long suspected life in the city is more stressful. Researchers have shown that the parts of the brain dealing with stress and emotion are affected by living among the crowds. The findings help shed light on why those who are born and raised in urban areas are more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression and schizophrenia than those brought up in the countryside. Country life: Past findings have shown that exposure to green space boosts health and reduces stress. The team of international scientists behind the finding plan are unsure why city life is so bad for the nerves. However, past studies have shown that exposure to green space reduces stress, boosts health and makes us less vulnerable to depression. The findings come from the brain scans of 32 healthy volunteers from urban and rural areas.