Poll: Segregating schools: A Good Idea?

[JWAN]

Why all the worry about socializing? I didn't think class time was time to look for a girlfriend.... Really are people that inept at interacting with people that school is the only way to make friends/gf/bf, you would see members of the opposite sex after school during breaks, when your about town, with friends. Separating the classroom doesn't stop you from interacting.

you would end up making people more socially awkward that usual

 

[EchetusXe]

Hell no.

 

[stompy]

All-girl schools (especially the "sister" colleges like Vassar and stuff) are viewed as shining beacons of light in the educational system. All-boys schools are frequent targets of "integration" and are rarely left alone...especially the military schools (remember that flap about integrating the Virginia Military Institute where they call each other "Brother Rat"?)

The "obsolete leftover from a sexist past" is a reference to the fact that all colleges in the U.S. used to be gender-segregated and very few colleges admitted women at all. I'm all for co-ed colleges, but once co-ed started becoming the norm, all-male colleges were/are seen as clinging to their sexist roots and are backward and closed-minded.

I thought we were discussing this idea for implementation into high school (well, secondary education) in particular, not tertiary education. Also, I guess that segregating high schools (by gender) isn't really the norm in the US, is it?

 

[PersianLlama]

All-girl schools (especially the "sister" colleges like Vassar and stuff) are viewed as shining beacons of light in the educational system. All-boys schools are frequent targets of "integration" and are rarely left alone...especially the military schools (remember that flap about integrating the Virginia Military Institute where they call each other "Brother Rat"?)

The "obsolete leftover from a sexist past" is a reference to the fact that all colleges in the U.S. used to be gender-segregated and very few colleges admitted women at all. I'm all for co-ed colleges, but once co-ed started becoming the norm, all-male colleges were/are seen as clinging to their sexist roots and are backward and closed-minded.

I thought we were discussing this idea for implementation into high school (well, secondary education) in particular, not tertiary education. Also, I guess that segregating high schools (by gender) isn't really the norm in the US, is it?

No. It's only in some private/religious schools. It's a stupid idea and many of the kids I know who go to those schools are socially inept.

 

[EXPLICITasian]

because guys and girls already have enough problems working together...

 

[scotth266]

(The one I really disagree with is segregation, voluntary or not, by religion. No greater harm could possible be done to a child's mind than indoctrination by a house of learning.)

Wow, biased much? I've been raised in both public and religious schools, and I far preferred the latter. At least most of the faculty pretended to give two craps about you, and some of them were awesome. Also, my brothers had a few years in a school run by nuns. Both were totally fine with it.
Besides, the good religious schools only try to instill some morals into you (not the religion itself), such as not humping everyone/thing in sight and to avoid drinking too much.

The only classes that should be seperated by gender are gym classes, due to the fact that guys and gals can have VERY different playstyles.

 

[stompy]

No. It's only in some private/religious schools. It's a stupid idea and many of the kids I know who go to those schools are socially inept.

Segregation of schools based on gender has its merits, something I think you fail to see because of your prior bias (I'll admit, I also have a bais in this matter). Frankly, like latenightapple [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.88338?page=4#1355346] said, both options should be available, and students and parents should choose, since people should be able to choose which learning environment suits their learning style best.

Note: Actually going to a single-gendered school (it's a government school by the way, and not in the US), and having seen some of my friends engage with the other gender, it seems social ineptness could be a lot more dependant on personality than people seem to think.

 

[rossatdi]

(The one I really disagree with is segregation, voluntary or not, by religion. No greater harm could possible be done to a child's mind than indoctrination by a house of learning.)

Wow, biased much? I've been raised in both public and religious schools, and I far preferred the latter. At least most of the faculty pretended to give two craps about you, and some of them were awesome. Also, my brothers had a few years in a school run by nuns. Both were totally fine with it.
Besides, the good religious schools only try to instill some morals into you (not the religion itself), such as not humping everyone/thing in sight and to avoid drinking too much.

The only classes that should be seperated by gender are gym classes, due to the fact that guys and gals can have VERY different playstyles.

So was I, High Church of England Primary then Secondary Comprehensive. Our teachers were good at both but I didn't have to attend chapel everyday or mass every Thursday. In the Comprehensive we had Religious Studies classes that covered more religions than one brand of Protestantism.

What your criticising isn't secular schooling, but bad schooling. There's nothing that states because religion doesn't have a place in schools, morality can't.

 

[Spleeni]

Hell no.

This post, while short, completely and fully encompasses my entire argument. The total amount of 'good' that segregation can do, is overcome by the incredible amount of HORROR that it could cause. Not only would it be difficult to initiate, have little discernable effect, cause massive amounts of sexism, stunt the emotional and sexual growth of everyone, and force the entire population to relocate to various places to be close enough for schooling.

 

[Super_Nintendo_Chalmers]

Not at all, i'm currently midway through my high school education, and i love having girls in my classes.
a) because they're the perfect distractions.
and b) because they're mainly very intelligent, and are able to teach me things and don't mind if i copy off of them.

 

[willard3]

All-girl schools (especially the "sister" colleges like Vassar and stuff) are viewed as shining beacons of light in the educational system. All-boys schools are frequent targets of "integration" and are rarely left alone...especially the military schools (remember that flap about integrating the Virginia Military Institute where they call each other "Brother Rat"?)

The "obsolete leftover from a sexist past" is a reference to the fact that all colleges in the U.S. used to be gender-segregated and very few colleges admitted women at all. I'm all for co-ed colleges, but once co-ed started becoming the norm, all-male colleges were/are seen as clinging to their sexist roots and are backward and closed-minded.

I thought we were discussing this idea for implementation into high school (well, secondary education) in particular, not tertiary education. Also, I guess that segregating high schools (by gender) isn't really the norm in the US, is it?

We were? Whoops.

And yeah, gender-segregated education in general is still pretty uncommon in the U.S.

 

[stompy]

And yeah, gender-segregated education in general is still pretty uncommon in the U.S.

Perhaps the reason why people are so against segregated learning (in this thread) is because it's got a 'bad rep' in the US? I'm wondering, because frankly, it's not as bad as everyone's making it out to be... I wouldn't consider myself unable to communicate with the opposite gender...

Edit:

in Australia the only single-gendered schools are expensive private schools.

Not in N.S.W...