Same Sex Schools Improve a Students Knowledge of The World
Debate Rounds (3)
Same Sex Schools may improve multiple aspects of academic learning, yet they blind the child to what the world is actually like. Students who participate in these schools may have high grades, unfortunately when these students try to integrate themselves in the world they normally are very behind in social education.
More than 1,700 students responded to a recent survey by the South Carolina Department of Education. Overall, three out of four student-respondents in grades 2 through 9 " students enrolled at 12 elementary schools, 18 middle schools and one high school " agreed that the single-gender approach was helping them in school.
"More and more South Carolina parents are choosing this option whenever and wherever it"s made available," said State Superintendent of Education Jim Rex. "This new survey shows that kids see value, too. They believe this approach helps them perform at a higher level."
South Carolina has been portrayed in national news reports as a pioneer in single-gender programs. Rex, who wants to expand curriculum choices within public schools, created an Office of Public School Choice at the Education Department and hired the nation"s first statewide coordinator to help local districts introduce the concept. More than 150 South Carolina public schools are expected to offer the single-gender option to parents next school year, many of them as partially autonomous operations within existing schools.
At South Carolina"s first-ever Public School Choice Conference in December, Rex unveiled legislation he will support during the 2008 General Assembly to increase the number and variety of choices available to students and their families. The bill, sponsored by Lexington County Republican Ted Pitts, would create public school choice committees in the state"s local school districts, each charged with creating new curriculum choices at the elementary, middle and high school levels within two years. Similar legislation was passed by bipartisan majorities last year in the House and Senate, but vetoed by Governor Mark Sanford.
Rex expects to hire a Montessori expert by the end of January, and he believes interest in that curriculum option also will be considerable.
"Public schools are looking for ways to offer more choices to parents and students," Rex said. "For most schools, it"s just a matter of learning how to create these programs and make them effective. The Education Department can help in showing them how to do that."
Current curriculum choices across South Carolina include magnet programs, schools-within-schools, alternative schools, virtual schools and charter schools. Some of the state"s public school choice programs include single-gender initiatives, middle college/early college, Montessori Education, evening high school, language immersion, academic academies, arts integration and international baccalaureate programs.
David Chadwell, the Education Department"s single-gender coordinator, said the student survey is believed to be the first of its kind in the nation. Students were asked to agree or disagree with statements that said being in a single-gender program had increased or improved their self-confidence, desire to succeed in school, interest in trying new ways to learn, independence, participation during class, ability to succeed in school, attitude in school, behavior in school and grades.
Highlights of the survey results included:
Roughly three-quarters of the students who participated in the survey believed that single-gender classes were contributing factors to their improvements in each category.
Although both boys and girls gave positive reviews to the single-gender experience, the strongest endorsements came from girls. Four out of five girls said the classes had improved their confidence, independence and participation, as well as both their desire and ability to succeed.
Students" positive assessments crossed ethnic lines, with few significant differences among white, African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American students. For example, 78 percent of African-American and Hispanic students said single-gender classrooms increased their desire to succeed in school, compared to 73 percent of white students and 71 percent of Asian-American students.
Elementary students responded positively at higher rates than middle and high school students, although majorities of students at all grade levels agreed that the single-gender approach had helped them in school.
Before I begin to argue I would like to point out that my opponent completely plagiarized his argument.
You are completely ignoring what this debate is on. This debate is about how single sex schools don't improve a students knowledge of the world. Yes a "single gender approach was helping them in school", yet when immersed into the real world these students have shown that they lack many basic socializing skills. I.E: "boys who spend more time with boys become increasingly aggressive; girls who spend more time with other girls become more sex-typed in their play." These types of people may make incredible students. But when placed into real world situation's these students are unaware of how to interact with the other sex.
Id like to begin by adding definitions for this argument
Sociology: the science or study of the origin, development, organization, and functioning of human society; the science of the fundamental laws of social relations, institutions, etc.
What source do you have to affirm your side and your information? In public and private schools (single sexed) there are social classes which show students (mail and female) how to be socially inclined. Such as the study of sociology. I think boys will be less inclined to show off after the affect of being around the same gender on the account of there being no usual means to show off
Citation for Previous Argument:
"The Case against Single-sex Schooling." Washington Post.
My opponent has expressed what he/she thinks in his/her last argument. Unfortunately looking at the facts, they state something different all together (quote in previous argument).
Schools may offer classes that teach people about social relations but that is not where children learn them. Children do not learn to socialize by taking the course sociology. You learn through by socializing with others. Children will be "working cooperatively in an academic environment with the opposite sex in the real world and therefore, essential to healthy development."
Citation for this argument:
"The Pros & Cons of Single Sex Classes in School."
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Kc.Nycolle 3 years 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:||1||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides made very good arguments thus making it difficult for me to vote. However I have to vote con because I have been to an all girls' school and learn better at the coed school I currently attend. It prepares me for interactions in the world and in the workplace.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.