Separate But Superior? A Review Of Issues And Data Bearing On Single-Sex Education

Mich., Nov. 13, 2006 —Policymakers’

recently rekindled romance with single-sex education is a superficial attraction

based more on feelings and preferences than evidence the programs actually work

to remedy a variety of educational problems according to a review of the

research on single-sex schooling released today by The Great Lakes Center for

Education Research & Practice.

In the report, Separate but Superior? A Review of Issues and Data Bearing on Single-Sex

Education, author Gerald Bracey reveals that much of the research on

single-sex schooling is flawed and rife with conflicts and contradictions. A

federal government effort to review existing research found 2,221 studies

initially, but when federal criteria for scientifically based research were

applied to them, all but 40 studies were eliminated. Of these, Bracey writes

that, “the largest numbers of studies by far find no differences between

single-sex education and co-education.”

Bracey goes on to

recommend that prior to undertaking any experiments in single-sex education,

policy makers should ask a series of specific questions that seek to impose more

structure and rigor to such efforts.

“Because there is

no compelling evidence that single-sex education will improve student learning

or test scores,” said Teri Battaglieri, executive director of The Great Lakes

Center, “we should put our energy and resources into the reforms that research

tells us will impact achievement for all students, such as lower class sizes,

hiring and retaining quality teachers and early childhood education.”

Single-sex

education has long been a part of private, particularly Catholic, schooling. It

was rekindled as a possible public school reform in 2001 when funding for

single-gender schools and classes was embedded in the No Child Left Behind law.

Last month, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings issued new Title IX

regulations, which clear the way for implementing such programs.

NCLB requires

that anyone considering offering a single-sex option must provide a rationale,

such as a historic failure of girls to enroll in certain classes offered for

both genders and that periodic reviews be conducted to justify an ongoing need

for the option. It also mandates that the same course be offered to the other

gender or provided to the rest of the students on a coed basis.

Summing up the

challenges ahead, Bracey quoted researcher Rosemary Salomone, who said, “The

paradox of single-sex and co-education is that the beliefs are so strong and the

evidence is so weak.”

The full

policy brief is available at http://www.greatlakescenter.org .

The mission of

the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to identify,

develop, support, publish and widely disseminate empirically sound

research on education policy and practices designed to improve the quality

of public education for all students within the Great Lakes Region.

Visit the Great Lakes

Center website at: http://www.greatlakescenter.or g

Contact:
Gerald Bracey (703)317-1716 (e-mail) gbracey1@verizon.net