Co-education is the best system
Debate Rounds (2)
1-Many pieces of research have demonstrated that the academic performance of males has declined increasingly in the past few decades(1); they would claim the attention of teachers due to their disruptive behaviour and of course hormones accompanying their adolescent years. Girls will be neglected and forgotten as there is a wide spread belief that girls can study on their own because they are more organised and diligent not because they are smart or in need of the teacher's guidance.
2-Boys would be less encouraged to participate in art or literature subjects with female teachers and girls present; they would feel less masculine or rough as the image they believe women have of them and they need to have it.
3-Boys and girls, as we all know, begin to feel the presence of the other sex around them from an early stage especially in their teen years and thus the presence of the other and the image in front of him or her becomes the most important not the learning process.
1. My opponent makes the argument that boys perform at lower levels than girls because of hormones. I would like to propose a more likely reason: teachers. Men account for less than 25% of teachers (1). Both males and females are of course better suited to teach their own kind, and female teacher dominance logically leads to girls performing better.
2. Your previous argument indicates that boys will be more interested in being with girls, but here your argument is that they will essentially run away because they want to save their reputation. This is a logical contradiction.
3. What about homosexuals? They will continue to feel this sexual tension, and probably even more so. It would be as if my opponent (a male, looking at his profile) were sent to an all-girl school. Solutions should be for everyone. Not for majorities, at the expense of minorities.
I also said that women and men mutually feel the existence of the other so both will become disoriented and overattentive to their "superficial" image. In a single-sex environment that tension becomes less. Keep in mind that I do not propose segregation in their social life as well. I only concentrate on schools, education.
As for homosexuals, you admit of sexual tension, and thus prove my point.
The article I posted says why men are less likely to be teachers. The reason is difference in general personality between the genders. Your idea of why is speculative and wrong.
Focusing on superficial images is unfortunately human nature. No separation of genders is going to change that.
How do you know separation would decrease tension? Couldn't one just as easily argue that separation increases tension? Tension does mean the state of being pulled apart, after all.
Your point is that segregation would end sexual tension. I simply show that it wouldn't. At no point did I say whether this was good or bad. Just that it proves your claim wrong.
I would like to thank you for this debate. I feel that perhaps more could have been said, however, had you set a higher round and character limit.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Frarf 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Con, You really screwed up this time.
Research this debate: United States