Historical View
Single-sex education has a long history. Even before the founding of the original colonies here in the United States, single-sex education was a common practice. Many countries in Europe, as well as worldwide, instituted the practice of single-sex education. However, this practice did not necessarily stem from the belief that it was a more beneficial way of disseminating information. The reason single-sex education was so prevalent stems from the fact that many countries and their societies believed that only men were worthy of an education. Many societies held to the belief that the role of the woman in society was to maintain the homestead and to raise children. The aim of this section is to briefly outline the history of single-sex education as it pertains to the impact of single-sex education on males in secondary schools.
Since the inception of public education, there has been much debate about the type and role of schools to be used to educate children. Before the beginning of public education for the masses in the United States, many students were being educated in single-sex environments. The debate over single-sex or co-educational schools began with the introduction of government directed education in the mid 1800s. The debate began because the more privileged families that were enjoying the benefits of sending their children to single-sex academies were at risk of having to mix with the "common" folk. Some leaders of the day felt that coeducation would be an appropriate way to not only educate but to socialize the children of different backgrounds. Arons (2003) states:
School wars have been fought in the United States since Horace Mann proposed in the 1840s that universal, compulsory education in government-supported common schools could be an effective means to socialize children to the proper social norms. The wars, of course, have almost always been about whose vision of these norms should hold sway. (p. 1)
Arons (2003), reviewing a book by Rosemary Salomone, hits the tip of the iceberg that began the debate over single-sex versus co-educational schools in the United States.
Single-sex education is not a new phenomenon in American education. It predates the founding of the United States itself. Salomone (1999) states: " In fact, single-sex education has a long history and tradition in the United States (and elsewhere)." (p.234) Salomone (1999) goes on to discuss how single-sex institutions dominated education, especially for the upper class until recent decades. The first single-sex schools in the United States were for male only students. Many of these institutions were developed by, and catered to, only the upper class. Single-sex schools for women arose later. As Salomone (1999) states: "Separate institutions for female students grew out of the exclusionary admissions policies of all-male institutions."(p. 234) Females were being excluded from the all-male institutions of education so they created their own single-sex learning institutions.
While single-sex education has been the preferred method of instruction of private and religious institutions, it is coeducation that has been dominant in the public domain since the beginning of education for the masses. Coeducation was especially prevalent in rural areas due to the ease of educating a large number of students in a single setting. This was viewed as a much more practical solution to compulsory education rather than developing separate single-sex academies. Salomone (1999) states: "However, coeducation has been the method preferred in the public sector since the beginning of mass schooling more than a century ago."(p. 234)
Other researchers feel the reasoning behind the preference for single-sex education is related to individual or family values. As previously mentioned, single-sex education rose out of societies that felt only males were worthy of an education. Many cultures clung to this sentiment for several generations. Even today there are those that would say women are not worthy of being educated. Otto (2004) underscores the commonly held beliefs of the 1800s when he states:
Single-sex education in the United States originated in a society that valued education only for males. The all-girls' schools that were eventually created were a reaction to the exclusion of females from the halls of learning-and in many cases, also an affirmation of the view that men and women needed different types of education.( p. 353)
Others feel an argument for single-sex education can be made on the basis that male dominance in the classroom does not lead to equal educational opportunities. There have been numerous studies that demonstrate the success of females in single-sex classes. Many of these studies attribute this success to the absence of a male population. Robinson and Smithers (1999) state: " ...based on the argument that boys so dominate mixed classes that 'true' equality of opportunity demands that the sexes be educated separately."(p. 24)
As mentioned earlier, coeducation had success in the early stages in rural areas where it was found to be a simple and effective way to educate children in sparsely populated areas. (Salomone, 1999). However, in urban areas where single-sex education was dominant, it was a different story altogether. School officials were in an uproar fearing that this forced mixing of students would result in the loss of their students from more affluent families and thus some of their funding. Solomone (1999) states:
In contrast, large urban centers such as Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia resisted coeducation for some time. School officials feared losing to the private academies the children of the upper classes whose parents vehemently opposed the intermingling of their children, and their daughters in particular, with lower class boys. (p. 234)
Regardless of its slow beginnings, coeducation eventually became the norm in the United States. Salomone (1999) states: "By the turn of the century, 98 percent of the public high schools across the country were coeducational with only 12 out of 628 reporting that they operated any single-sex high schools."(p. 234) Coeducation was deemed to be the most appropriate and efficient way to educate the masses while satisfying the compulsory education requirements set forth by the government.
The number of single-sex schools began to increase in the early Twentieth Century. Salomone (1999) discusses how reformers, who felt the children of recent immigrants were not capable of academic pursuits, often tracked these children into vocational classes. The large number of these classes made up of mostly children of immigrants eventually led to the development of entire vocational schools. Due to the nature of the course work, the classes and schools were strongly sex-segregated, and were largely dominated by male populations.
Since that time, many single-sex schools have dropped by the wayside in the wake of government legislation that guarantees equal opportunities for students regardless of sex, race, or religion. This legislation stems from the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX legislation passed in 1972. "Title IX regulation 34 CFR 106.34 mandates that no school receiving any federal funds shall 'provide any course or otherwise carry out any of its education program or activity separately on the basis of sex." (Bronski, 2002) This legislation meant that any school that did not offer equal opportunity and/or funding for both sexes faced restructuring or being closed. Dalton (2002) states:
Today, however, single-sex education is the exception rather than the rule. In particular, male-only colleges have all but disappeared, and women's colleges comprise only a small percentage of the total colleges and universities in the United States. Despite the laudatory purposes of these programs, many of these programs have ended because they have been determined to discriminate on the basis of gender. (p. 395)
Although difficult under the government guidelines, some private and parochial schools have remained single-sex rather than allow coeducation or disbanding. Otto (2004) delineates the complications and the opportunities:
As with the Equal Education Opportunities Act, federal law under Title IX is complicated but can be accommodated while providing the best possible education for those students who do better in a single-sex environment. Districts would merely have to take advantage of the non-application of Title IX to primary and secondary schools, and ensure that neither sex is barred from a federally supported institution or program. (p. 353)
By following these government guidelines, in this manner many traditional single-sex institutions have been able to continue operating in their traditional capacity. However, the merits and legality of such institutions continue to be questioned and challenged in debates on education throughout the United States.
In recent years there has been a resurgence in the popularity of single-sex educational facilities, and not just in the private sector. In California legislation was introduced to allow for single-sex education. New legislation allowing for change in the educational system is often the result of dissatisfaction with current practices. Datnow, Hubbard, and Conchas (2001) state: "In 1997, amidst a climate of dissatisfaction with public education, California's (now former) Governor Pete Wilson took a prodigious step and drafted legislation providing funding for the establishment of single gender academies."(p. 185)
The study by Datnow et al. (2001) suggested that the public was frustrated with the sub-standard results of co-education and wanted change. Even the Bush administration decided to get involved in the debate over single-sex education. The Bush administration aims to increase funding for the development of more single-sex public schools in the United States. Bronski (2002) states: "Specifically, Bush wants to spend $385 million from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, a reform of the nation's public schools that calls for more parental choice and teacher/student accountability in education, to create schools for boys and schools for girls."(p. 1)
It remains to be seen what the impact of the Bush initiative will eventually be. However, the fact is there are more single-sex schools in the United States now than in the past few decades. There are approximately thirty single-sex public schools currently open in the United States with several more slated to begin operation in the next year or the next few years. Due to the merits and renewed popularity of these institutions, the number of single-sex schools and classrooms will continue to rise over the next decade.
The history of single-sex education shows how the practice has been viewed in the past. This history has played heavily into the beliefs of policy makers as they are constantly trying to develop the most beneficial form of education for the masses today. Some reformers feel that the history of single-sex education points out its weaknesses that point to co-education as the more beneficial form of education. Others feel that it is the rich history that points to successes in education that have come from single-sex education.