First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Have you ever/do you attend a single sex school/educational institute?
Posted 1/23/16

Thaendril wrote:

Personally in a -school- environment I feel like this is bad. Males and Females growing up together learn how to interact with one another and if done right how to respect one another. When you segregate the sexes like this you end up with both sides graduating with little to no experience with the opposite sex and NO idea with how to really interact with them. Both create pre-conceptions of what it should be like and thats just bad for everyone.


What assumptions are you making here? That going to a single sex school equates to having zero contact with the other gender? I went from a girl's school to a mixed college (equivalent to high school) and had no issues with it. Why? Because no shit, you can interact with the other gender outside of school.

The girls in my school had many friends who were guys and there was no shortage of boyfriends either, so this assumption is completely wrong. If you do have trouble with the other gender after leaving school, that reflects more on your own social skills than anything else. The girls in my class who struggled could barely communicate with other girls let alone guys.
13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 1/23/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

EVERY girl has a vagina. But any assertion that states X race is generally smarter than y race is contentious.

If I swapped out 'race' for 'gender' is it not contentious?

Unlike gender, the only real constant difference is skin color and ethnic heritage, and even then, that's not completely accurate.

What 'real constant difference' would you say gender offers that would deem it substantially worthy to segregate educational opportunities?

I suppose, I'm of a differing opinion on this compared to most. I see the rewards of integration much higher than those of segregation (even gender)--though not in its immediate results. The only worthy segregation to be made is without barring. To offer a rigorous math course path and one less so--for example. Perhaps even to offer an English course more verbally taught and one more visually taught. Another, to offer classes more independently studied and those not. Online classes and offline. Etc.




It not about one gender being smarter than the other, it is about differences in how they learn and how they react to different learning environments. While I don't think that segregation is a good idea, I do think that there are large changes in the education system required to suit the needs of individuals, as today's system is failing on that regard. More than anything, it is failing boys.

Especially during school age, where boys and girls are maturing at different rates, generally they react to different kinds of teaching in different ways. While this is not true for every individual, it tends to seem true as a group. Because of that, the argument that "one school teaching classes designed for boys and another teaching classes designed for girls" would potentially be a valid argument for the improving of educational outcomes (however it comes with the drawback of reducing social outcomes).

I believe that these goals can be accomplished without segregation through things like you mentioned (having different types of courses available to everyone) as well as improvements in educational technology allowing for more individualized teaching and ensuring that teachers understand how to teach different kinds of students instead of demanding every student learn the same way.
19493 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / United States, DE
Offline
Posted 1/23/16
Nah, I'm the type of girl who makes friends with guys a lot easier, so trying to fit in with only girls could be rough.

I mean I'm sure I could manage, but it would be more stressful.

Unless I found myself a beautiful onee-san to teach me the ropes.
25638 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
50 / M / Chicago, IL
Online
Posted 1/23/16
All boys Catholic high school. No big thing.
6358 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 1/23/16
I don't there are any of those types of school in Norway? Not that I know of. Aren't they usually just religious schools though?
Either way, it sounds stupid and boring just being with the same gender all the time.

Well, the last 3 years in school I have been in a class with only guys so Idk how to talk to girls. In middle school I never talked to my female classmates, because ya know...All they talk about is make up, boys and getting drunk at parties....At that age...Ugh.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 1/23/16

sundin13 wrote:

It not about one gender being smarter than the other, it is about differences in how they learn and how they react to different learning environments. While I don't think that segregation is a good idea, I do think that there are large changes in the education system required to suit the needs of individuals, as today's system is failing on that regard. More than anything, it is failing boys.

Especially during school age, where boys and girls are maturing at different rates, generally they react to different kinds of teaching in different ways. While this is not true for every individual, it tends to seem true as a group. Because of that, the argument that "one school teaching classes designed for boys and another teaching classes designed for girls" would potentially be a valid argument for the improving of educational outcomes (however it comes with the drawback of reducing social outcomes).

I believe that these goals can be accomplished without segregation through things like you mentioned (having different types of courses available to everyone) as well as improvements in educational technology allowing for more individualized teaching and ensuring that teachers understand how to teach different kinds of students instead of demanding every student learn the same way.


Correct, aiming to address those issues without gender segregation is ideal. Having to resort to segregating by gender is a more regressive approach. It undermines individual needs while simultaneously facilitating the differences between the sexes and providing inequitable opportunity. I disagree it only results in social outcome casualty however. Such segregation would notably enforce gender discrepancies in educational outcomes rather than challenge them.

The lack of recess--competition even--isn't helping the majority of boys. If a middle ground is better met, and more options provided for all learning types we'd see more beneficial results instead of deceptive and immediate results (like test scores).

13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 1/23/16 , edited 1/23/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

Correct, aiming to address those issues without gender segregation is ideal. Having to resort to segregating by gender is a more regressive approach. It undermines individual needs while simultaneously facilitating the differences between the sexes and providing inequitable opportunity. I disagree it only results in social outcome casualty however. Such segregation would notably enforce gender discrepancies in educational outcomes rather than challenge them.

The lack of recess--competition even--isn't helping the majority of boys. If a middle ground is better met, and more options provided for all learning types we'd see more beneficial results instead of deceptive and immediate results (like test scores).



I can agree to most of that, but I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "such segregation would enforce gender discrepancies in educational outcomes". The segregated method wouldn't, for example, teach different courses to boys vs girls, it would just aim to teach them in different ways. This way, overall outcomes for both genders would improve (likely more for boys than for girls, as the current education system is already fairly gynocentric). Some individuals wouldn't thrive as much in this system when compared to an individualized system, although the number of individuals who aren't being suited by the current system is likely significantly higher.
16757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 1/23/16
Nope and I am against it. Feels like you are treating the two sexes as if they are naturally different. I've seen girls that fit in better with guys than girls.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 1/23/16

sundin13 wrote:
I can agree to most of that, but I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "such segregation would enforce gender discrepancies in educational outcomes". The segregated method wouldn't, for example, teach different courses to boys vs girls, it would just aim to teach them in different ways. This way, overall outcomes for both genders would improve (likely more for boys than for girls, as the current education system is already fairly gynocentric). Some individuals wouldn't thrive as much in this system when compared to an individualized system, although the number of individuals who aren't being suited by the current system is likely significantly higher.


The current system has many problems, lol.

Enforcing different methods of teaching based on gender will only facilitate those differences (including educational outcome). If, for example, women are negated to challenge their spatial learning--then later down the road math courses and such will only be much harder to grasp in such a manner. On the opposite hand, boys may be provided with less verbal skills should they only be generally taught visually. It basically pits women one way and boys the other way. Despite their being exception (growing exception) against it. Perhaps more suitable for most--but it leaves quite a number of individuals, such as myself, at odds. The major casualty I'm pointing to, however, is that it would only further stimulate educational outcome differences between the sexes rather than inspire change in those gendered differences. It would be adapting to system to cater to those differences, rather than to challenge and provide for the opportunity of their slow, but eventual dissolution.

42405 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Online
Posted 1/23/16
I'd kill myself if I had to go to an all girls school. No...just...no!
13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 1/23/16 , edited 1/23/16

PrinceJudar wrote:


sundin13 wrote:
I can agree to most of that, but I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "such segregation would enforce gender discrepancies in educational outcomes". The segregated method wouldn't, for example, teach different courses to boys vs girls, it would just aim to teach them in different ways. This way, overall outcomes for both genders would improve (likely more for boys than for girls, as the current education system is already fairly gynocentric). Some individuals wouldn't thrive as much in this system when compared to an individualized system, although the number of individuals who aren't being suited by the current system is likely significantly higher.


The current system has many problems, lol.

Enforcing different methods of teaching based on gender will only facilitate those differences (including educational outcome). If, for example, women are negated to challenge their spatial learning--then later down the road math courses and such will only be much harder to grasp in such a manner. On the opposite hand, boys may be provided with less verbal skills should they only be generally taught visually. It basically pits women one way and boys the other way. Despite their being exception (growing exception) against it. Perhaps more suitable for most--but it leaves quite a number of individuals, such as myself, at odds. The major casualty I'm pointing to, however, is that it would only further stimulate educational outcome differences between the sexes rather than inspire change in those gendered differences. It would be adapting to system to cater to those differences, rather than to challenge and provide for the opportunity of their slow, but eventual dissolution.



I don't think that is the only road that could to be gone down in the segregated learning paths.

For example, boys typically have lower scores in reading than girls and are often put off by the way reading and writing is handled in schools. I was one of those individuals and the reason I pretty much quit reading for years was because schools turned me off to it. If reading was taught more according to gender, boys would be given more open ended questions to think about for their reading assignments and the choices of books could be more tailored to focus and things that boys in class would actually enjoy, like books focusing more of action and events than books focusing on emotions and interactions.

For both genders, efforts could be made to focus on the areas that they are lacking.

EDIT: I do want to say that I do see your point. Say, women tend to function worse in a competitive environment while men tend to function better, so if taught using competition, while education outcomes may improve, will this cause women to struggle more with competition in the workplace? Maybe, and that is certainly a concern that would need to be addressed, even in the individualized learning environment that I would like. However, I don't think the problem is quite as massive as you think.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 1/23/16

sundin13 wrote:



I cannot view it an appropriate method for addressing the issues of education. Take even the reading material you suggested: emotional and socially interactive for girls and violence, action and events for boys. Ideally there should be a mix of both, regardless of gender. Despite the segregation being well intentioned (to support what is lacking), the solution would create deeper rifts educational outcomes unknowingly (supporting those more akin to their gender and shafting those not).

Currently the educational balance is simply tilted in the favor of women--the current issue. Instead of simply splitting the sexes apart, the practical approach is to address the needs of individuals while promoting the dissolution of those differences--benefits ideally reaped by both. Fixing the balance is the primary issue though.

Perhaps the issue is not as massive as I think, but I cannot take the position of gender segregated schooling as anything but a backwards solution to current issues. Simply illusive and temporarily beneficial, but in the more gradual scheme of the matter--detrimentally regressive.

1106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / PA
Offline
Posted 1/23/16
After a couple sexes I'd probably be too tired.
11 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/23/16 , edited 1/23/16

mentalese wrote:


Thaendril wrote:

Personally in a -school- environment I feel like this is bad. Males and Females growing up together learn how to interact with one another and if done right how to respect one another. When you segregate the sexes like this you end up with both sides graduating with little to no experience with the opposite sex and NO idea with how to really interact with them. Both create pre-conceptions of what it should be like and thats just bad for everyone.


What assumptions are you making here? That going to a single sex school equates to having zero contact with the other gender? I went from a girl's school to a mixed college (equivalent to high school) and had no issues with it. Why? Because no shit, you can interact with the other gender outside of school.

The girls in my school had many friends who were guys and there was no shortage of boyfriends either, so this assumption is completely wrong. If you do have trouble with the other gender after leaving school, that reflects more on your own social skills than anything else. The girls in my class who struggled could barely communicate with other girls let alone guys.


It isn't really so much an assumption as though I'll openly admit my comment was a bit more universal than I intended it to be as hinting at 'all' in this case was a bit of a mistake, for which I do apologize.

In my own experience with this though again it was and wasn't in a school environment as my military training and school was male only but when i went to a normal school it was gender mixed.

I will say the thing I missed the most wasn't the 'interaction' with females as so much their perception of things. Women overall view many things very different than a guy and suddenly going through events and such and -not- having that viewpoint to consider and act on was a major obstacle to overcome. Where as if we had women in the groups at the time it would have been another view to consider and every action I feel would have had a slightly more rounded outcome. This is kind of the core of the issue I see with splitting boys and girls in school as while yes you can still have a normal happy life while segregated I will hold that you still miss out on certain aspects of life that otherwise would be beneficial to both sides.

However, I can really only speak of my own personal experiences from being segregated to an 'all male' environment and again apologize if my initial comment made it sound I was applying such things to everyone. It also comes again from being segregated in a different way. When we were split from females in training.. it wasn't like we were split from females and still could meet them on off time. We had -none- around, at all. Every instructor was male, all staff was male female contact didn't resurface until almost a year and a half later when we graduated.
13579 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 1/23/16
No but I kind of wish I did since girls are scary.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.