Single-Sex Education in Public Schools
Thank you for starting this debate. I shall argue that public schools should remain co-ed. My points are as follows:
1. School is practice for the "real world"- In school, children learn skills needed to succeed as adults. Even more important than academic facts are social skills- how children interact with others. By keeping public schools co-ed, children would learn social skills that they will use their whole lives. Pro has said that same-sex schools would eliminate girls getting distracted by guys and vice versa. However, this is an important part of growing up. Kids gain experience and wisdom from events that happen in school, and this should not be forcibly denied from them.
2. Forced same-sex education creates sexism- If parents want to send children to private same-sex schools, that's their decision. However, making all public schools divided by sex actually aggravates sexism. This is the era where society is becoming more gender equal; making public schools same-sex is a step backwards. If schools were forced to become divided by gender, inequalities would arise, as well as result in deepened stereotypes. Children will feel defined by their sex, not who they are as a person. Therefore, though same-sex education might "prevent sexist jokes in class", as Pro says, it does nothing to help the underlying problem of sexism. It actually worsens it.
3. An unnecessary drain on resources- If same-sex public schools were implemented, more schools would need to be built, which takes up money that would be put to much better use elsewhere in the school district: new technology, for example. On the other hand, if only existing schools were used by dividing them into gendered schools, each school would have to serve a much larger area, increasing travel time and transportation costs.
Based on these points, same-sex public schools are not only unnecessary, they will have harmful effects on their students.
Thank you for your arguments. I shall give a rebuttal to each of your points separately.
"New Schools would not have to be built to separate genders just different sections of a building."
That would only limit the classes that kids can choose. In average sized schools, there are only a few sections of each class. If students are limited by which gender the class is, they might not get the classes that would challenge them the most. Classes without enough students would not run.
"Also It would prevent violence in some cases if they are separate sections in a building."
Violence does not happen exclusively across genders. In many cases, girls fight girls, and boys also fight boys. Therefore this would not have a significant effect on violence rates in school. Also, having a sufficient amount of teachers watching hallways between classes would be much more effective than separating the genders.
"Things like teen pregnancy would go down"
If everyone is still in the same school, that would not have much of an effect on teen pregnancy since it is still possible for teenagers to get together outside of school. School, if co-ed, is a good opportunity to find out more about a wide range of people, so that teenagers know when they are getting into a questionable relationship.
"Kids would learn better because males and females learn better so A teacher can focus on one thing."
It is not clear what Pro means here. Presently, teachers teach with one method to everyone, and there is no significant difference between how effective the lesson is for boys and girls.
"It would also make talking in class go down because learning should be the number 1 focus in school"
Separating genders would not make talking in class go down, because the amount of talking isn't because of gender. The classes with only girls will still talk amongst themselves, and so will the boys.
Pro has not made any points which proves that same-sex public schools will help the education system. Pro has also declined to respond to most of my points regarding sexism. I stand by my position.
TheAmazingAtheist forfeited this round.
Thank you for this debate.