How effective is Same-Sex Classroom in the Greater Houston ISD
Table of Contents
Introduction1
Background1
Statement of the Problem3
Research Hypothesis4
Null Hypothesis4
Significance of the Study5
Operational Definition of Terms5
Methodology6
Research Methods6
Research Design7
Sample of Participants7
Sampling Procedure8
Type of Instrument9
Summary of Research Procedure9
Discussion10
Overview10
The Law and Same-Sex Classroom11
Arguments Supporting Same-Sex Classroom12
Arguments in Opposition to Same-Sex Classroom14
Differences between the Two Genders15
The Impact of Single-Sex Schools on Girls' Academic Achievement17
The Impact of Single-Sex Schools on Boys' Academic Achievement19
Do Single-Sex Schools Work?21
Conclusion22
References25
How effective is Same-Sex Classroom in the Greater Houston ISD
Introduction
The modernization of life demands top quality schooling. In order to generate effective results from individuals along with the maintenance of quality human resource, proper schooling and educational system is required (Blessing, 2005). The purpose of schools and educational systems primarily is to work on raw pupils and to transform them completely according to the needs and demands of the current industrial and technical market. These people will develop either passive or active personalities and display traits that would fit their surrounding and environment in which these individuals shall excel and work.
One of the key issues regarding schooling has constantly been a subject of talks and debates. The issue is regarding the two basic types of educational systems that have been made on the basis of sex or gender (Datnow & Hubbard, 2008). These systems are single sex education and co-education. The long standing debates have remained unsuccessful to come to a conclusion that which of the two educational systems tends to yield the best and most effective genres of quality education and understanding for students to dwell and work upon. This research papers aims to discuss the key findings relating to both the educational systems with measuring the benefits and limitations of both.
Background
Over the past 30 years, a debate about the effectiveness of single-sex schools has raged within academic circles. Its advocates have long argued that single-sex schools improve student performance and reduce gender stereotypes (Bryk & Lee, 1986; Catsambis, 1994). Meanwhile, its opponents believe that these schools create no academic benefits for their students, stunt the social development of these students, and are generally inefficient (Datnow, Hubbard, & Woody, 2001). As a result of this disagreement, the discussion has essentially been condensed into three primary questions. In what ways, if any, do single-sex schools foster a greater level of academic achievement? How do single-sex learning environments impact students' academic and social experiences in high school? How do these environments affect students' postsecondary ambitions?
Proponents of single-sex schools include educational researchers Linda J. Sax, Valerie E. Lee, and Helen M. Marks. They argue that single-sex schools promote an environment more conducive to learning than coed schools and specifically help girls' test scores, confidence, and scholastic engagement (Sax, 2009). Furthermore, Fred Mael writes that such environments reduce the amount of 'rating and dating' and the emphasis on social standing in schools that is seen in coed environments (Mael F. A., 1998). Many proponents also believe that having peers exclusively of the same sex will increase students' focus on academics as there will be fewer social ...