Opinions

Friday, Aug. 29, 2008

Single-sex classrooms

Supporters of single-gender classrooms concede that they don't have a lot of hard data to show that segregating boys and girls improves test scores. But until the verdict is in, gut instinct and the reactions of the pupils themselves indicate that single-gender classrooms work.

In trying to determine how well they work, the answer is likely to come from South Carolina. Of the 442 schools nationwide that feature single-sex classes, half are in the Palmetto State.

While few of those schools are in York County, some have decided to experiment with single-gender classes. Jefferson Elementary School in York, India Hook Elementary School in Rock Hill and Fort Mill Middle School have launched single-gender programs.

Not all students will be separated. Those who are won't be separated all day. They will get together for classes such as gym and computer lab.

While this might be a new approach in the public school system, single-gender education is nothing new. In fact, over the centuries, segregating students by gender has been the norm. While modern testing research may be scant, hands-on experience and behavioral data regarding the difference in the way boys and girls learn are abundant.

State Superintendent of Education Jim Rex has hired David Chadwell as the nation's first state official dedicated solely to helping schools establish single-gender classrooms. Chadwell, a former teacher, travels the state promoting the program and organizes teacher training. Any school can contact him for help.

We applaud the willingness of both the state and York County schools to experiment with this innovative approach. If it works, South Carolina schools would be ahead of the rest of the country in adopting it.

The anecdotal evidence suggests that students benefit from not having the distraction of members of the opposite sex in the classroom. Girls apparently appreciate the quieter boy-free environment, while boys appreciate not having to dress to impress the girls.

Experts can point to a host of other behavioral differences that can detract from learning in a mixed classroom. The experts can offer ways to enhance learning by targeting gender-specific traits.

We have some reservations about this approach. Students have to learn to interact with members of the opposite sex at some point, and the classroom probably is the best place for them to do that.

We also worry that schools could inadvertently reinforce gender stereotypes in a single-gender classroom. Not all girls like a calm, quiet environment; not all boys like a noisy, active one.

But this is an experiment worth conducting. Many South Carolina schools have room for improvement, and this is a promising approach.

Again, we congratulate state and local school officials for their willingness to take a chance on something new.