At all all-woman’s university, the president of the student body, the head of the yearbook and the captain of the sports teams are women. At a coed university, they are generally not.
If I had a daughter, I would encourage her to go to an all-woman’s university.
Most of the people here discussed women’s schools being single-sex. I’ve always heard that girls get no advantage or disadvantage, statistically speaking, in single-sex education.
Boys, however, do. It doesn’t seem to be so much the specific presence of girls, but that environments lacking girls encourage more male-oriented education tools, more intensive learning, and freer discussion. There’s tighter discipline, but a surprising flexibility and focus. The difference can be dramatic, taking boys from running a distant second place in learning to a surprising first.
In any case, that’s what I’ve been told. Can’t say if it’s true, but some experiments definitely indicated such.
And in fact, whatever happens in high school, at the present time women exceed men in all levels of secondary education, both in performance and in numbers. Census education factsheet: the youngest age group in which men earn more postsecondary degrees than women is 45 to 65.
College and post-college performance is so consistently poorer for men, that it is considered a crisis in post-high school education by some, particularly for certain racial or ethnic classifications. For example 60% of college degrees awarded to latinos, are awarded to women. College Board Consortium, “The Educational Crisis Facing Young Men of Color”:
Certain prestigious public universities, notably UNC-Chapel Hill as described in this article, are seeing incoming classes that push 60% women.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/fashion/07campus.html?pagewanted=all
All-girls school might be better for certain individuals, but the idea that women in general need to be protected and boosted in order to have equal performance in postsecondary education is not only wrong, it’s laughably wrong.
Right, because our innocent, virginal, teenage girls would never, ever want to have sex if it weren’t for those evil boys.
As to the OP, there is no evidence that same sex schools are consistently better than mixed schools:
I’m sure it might matter for individuals, but on the whole, no real benefit.
I never went to a single sex school, but in eighth grade I was in a math class that was all girls. There were three classes, one mostly boys, one mixed, and mine, all girls. Supposedly this was just the way the computers had arranged it, based on other classes we were taking and their times. We learned a lot that year.
I work in a community college and this is my understanding of it. The “delicate little girls who have no voice in the classroom” is something someone with an agenda made up because it suited their preconceived notions, there is no evidence for it. And in fact, every study contradicts this notion. It’s also completely against my experience in the classroom: Girls talking is them “socializing”, boys talking is “disruptive”. I have been told by teachers verbatim that it is alright for girls to talk during class (about whatever they wanted, not the lessons).
Gender-wise the academic crisis in the united states is about boys lagging behind, girls are doing great.
No, it was based on an actual study. The study that claimed that girls were being widely ignored in classroms was in 1992 with a 1998 followup, “Gender Gaps: Where Schools Still Fail Our Children” (pdf).
Much was made in 1992 of lagging female science & math course enrollment at the high school level. But as of 2001, this study of California public high schools showed more girls enrolled in high level classes in every subject except computer science.
The considerable educational achievment lead for women suggests that if girls still get less attention in class, it apparently doesn’t matter.
I dunno… as a high-school or college kid, being the only boy at an all-girls school would have sounded kinda like paradise to me. 
I will have to check the book I cited earlier if we are talking about the same study. The book I read said that the group that made the silenced voiced girls claim never actually released their study, only their results. I will have to check with the book when I can get back to the library.
This conversation is getting a little silly. Boys AND girls are lagging in education for different reasons. For my school, girls are expected to be adults early, have babies, be submissive to boys, fight each other for scraps, whatever. The boys have to hustle, join gangs or start posturing, play sports, whatever.
Single sex education can be quite beneficial in some communities. While Urban Prep in Chicago may not raise test scores, what it does for boys’ mental and personal well-being (and their futures) is nothing short of astounding.
Newsflash: boys and girls are wired differently.
I went to a Maritime Academy when the requirement was male between 17 and 22 years.
When it bacame coed it really lchanged things. The midshipmen became softer. Life became easier, the upper classmen had to back off. Equator crossing is definetely not the same in fact I don’t think they have anything any more.
But the Midshipmen did become more civil. Pig pushes ended. La Wherta (sp) trips stopped being major conservvations.
It would be nice if you could translate that into land lubber, I have no idea what any of it meant except equator crossing.
I have no idea either, but it sounded vaguely sexual.
I believe the shellback ceremony generally is (or was, that is.)
Incidentally it occurred to me that I didn’t mention that my friend went to an all girls college. Not that that should change any posts or anything, just that I didn’t clarify it. Says they didn’t lock their doors, ect.
Actually, you did.
I lived in a coed dorm and those guys were like a whole herd of brothers to me. I’m confused about what no locking your doors has to do with coed education. Either the college was in an extremely safe location, or they offered extraordinary security. My dorm building had exterior security doors to keep out non-residents (passcard system), but we didn’t generally lock our our dorm room door either, unless we were gone.
And when we did lock our doors it wasn’t because we feared being raped by our male counterparts. It was because some people in every bunch like to steal shit. This is true at all-women’s colleges as well based on the reports of several friends who went to Wellsley.
Separately, I once knew the only male residentially enrolled at Bryn Mawr. He was taking courses co-listed through Haverford, which is not unusual, and for some reason, they let him live on campus, which is.
I attended a private boys school. It was a wonderful experience, particulary when compared to the public system. The only down side was that back then it was for boys only. The trick is for the faculty to recognize and deal with the differences between the sexes.
I suspect that it is because no male has sued to be admitted to Girl’s High, while some female sued for admission to Central. I suspect that if some male threatened to sue they would not fight it since there is no chance they would win.
I have no idea what that sentence means, but if the second term is Spanish it’s probably la huerta (lit. “the vegetable garden”).