Yay or Nay?

Same-Sex Public Schools Hit Milestone, Few Obstacles

It has been my opinion for years, that the majority of Public Schools are not designed for boys. Boys have more energy, they don't sit still for long periods of time, and they interact differently.

As a father of 2 boys and 1 girl, I am all for splitting them up. Not for relational type issues, but for learning reasons.

I went to an all male school and enjoyed it. Not having women in your classes from 8-3 didn't deter or hinder my social skills with females at all.

I vote yay. Or at least same sex classes.

It's been noted that many girls feel intimidated by boys, and are afraid to ask questions or pursue further studies.

Boys, like you say, need more activity. Something female teachers (who dominate the profession) are loathe to do.

Split them up after 3rd grade.

Make it an earned privilege come 10-12 grade to have co-ed classes. (Earned by taking Honors or AP classes).

I say nay. I went to school in a multi gendered class and have no ill effects from it. I think this stems from male paranoia about the fact that girls are starting to score higher on tests and such.

I do believe that there needs to be more physical activity in school though.

uhmump95 Wrote:I say nay. I went to school in a multi gendered class and have no ill effects from it. I think this stems from male paranoia about the fact that girls are starting to score higher on tests and such.

I do believe that there needs to be more physical activity in school though.

One thing that I have noticed is that my kids don't get anywhere near the recess time that I had.

Why do you think that girls are starting to test higher than boys? What would cause that?

GrayBeard Wrote:One thing that I have noticed is that my kids don't get anywhere near the recess time that I had.

Why do you think that girls are starting to test higher than boys? What would cause that?

This is due to No Child Left Behind... teachers have so much pressure to make sure everyone scores high on that test that schools have been forced to cut back on recess time.

As far as girls scoring higher, it is because they are getting a real education today. In the past many parents would not push their daughters, only their sons in the education arena. Now that most families have two incomes the women are getting a good education and the same backing as the men had.

uhmump95 Wrote:I say nay. I went to school in a multi gendered class and have no ill effects from it. I think this stems from male paranoia about the fact that girls are starting to score higher on tests and such.

I do believe that there needs to be more physical activity in school though.

no one said you would get any ill effects from it. However, there were some great advantages I had by going to an all-male high school. I was quite focused

uhmump95 Wrote:I say nay. I went to school in a multi gendered class and have no ill effects from it. I think this stems from male paranoia about the fact that girls are starting to score higher on tests and such.

Ugh, just when I think there's hope, you regress back into unsubstantiated aspersions. Not everyone is "paranoid" or driven by fear and loathing.

He's not saying that everyone is paranoid or driven by fear and loathing.

I went to a private coed HS, but I had some friends who went to same sex schools. One in particular had a boys school on one side of the football field, and a seperate girls school on the other side. There was still some crossover, since foreign language was all in the boys school, while there were some classes only in the girls school. There was still tons of interaction b/w boys/girls and social events/dances, but classes with the exception of language, etc were same sex. They all turned out fine. Although, the girls school recently closed due to enrollment and they have since combined.

mlb Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:One thing that I have noticed is that my kids don't get anywhere near the recess time that I had.

Why do you think that girls are starting to test higher than boys? What would cause that?

This is due to No Child Left Behind... teachers have so much pressure to make sure everyone scores high on that test that schools have been forced to cut back on recess time.

As far as girls scoring higher, it is because they are getting a real education today. In the past many parents would not push their daughters, only their sons in the education arena. Now that most families have two incomes the women are getting a good education and the same backing as the men had.

Girls were getting a real education when I went to school as well. In fact they were sitting in the same classes that I was in. Now, you will notice that in many schools the Gifted classes are almost entirely girls while the boys are struggling to keep up. Why is that? Because the current teaching methodology is not designed for boys to excel in.

Now, is that the fault of no-child left behind? Could be. In FL, everything is geered to the end-of-the year FCAT. IMO, this EOY testing needs to be tossed.

GrayBeard Wrote:

mlb Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:One thing that I have noticed is that my kids don't get anywhere near the recess time that I had.

Why do you think that girls are starting to test higher than boys? What would cause that?

This is due to No Child Left Behind... teachers have so much pressure to make sure everyone scores high on that test that schools have been forced to cut back on recess time.

As far as girls scoring higher, it is because they are getting a real education today. In the past many parents would not push their daughters, only their sons in the education arena. Now that most families have two incomes the women are getting a good education and the same backing as the men had.

Girls were getting a real education when I went to school as well. In fact they were sitting in the same classes that I was in. Now, you will notice that in many schools the Gifted classes are almost entirely girls while the boys are struggling to keep up. Why is that? Because the current teaching methodology is not designed for boys to excel in.

Now, is that the fault of no-child left behind? Could be. In FL, everything is geered to the end-of-the year FCAT. IMO, this EOY testing needs to be tossed.

I agree. I hear a lot about this stuff, since my mom has worked in a school district for almost 40 years (not teaching, but shes still around it all). I hear about how much this program is failing on a daily basis. Now I'm not so sure NCLB is contributing to boys having trouble. But I do know it isnt helping them either. The ultimate goal is no longer to create well rounded intelligent students. It is to pass that test. Period. The funding depends on it.

GrayBeard Wrote:Now, you will notice that in many schools the Gifted classes are almost entirely girls while the boys are struggling to keep up. Why is that? Because the current teaching methodology is not designed for boys to excel in.

How has the teaching methodology changed?

My wife is a teacher and I will ask her if she feels the way we now teach is more conducive to girls learning more than boys.

niuhuskie84 Wrote:The ultimate goal is no longer to create well rounded intelligent students. It is to pass that test. Period. The funding depends on it.

You have nailed it. My wife's school is focusing now on teaching kids to pass tests in Feb, Mar and April. Teaching the various standardized tests are now a full time process.

I understand there has to be a method to hold schools accountable, but I do not think these standardized tests are the way to do it.

I think separate schools probably are better, since the distraction of the other sex - boyfriends/girlfriends, flirting, etc., are not there. But mixed schools can and have done well too.

Girls and boys muture at different rates, physically, sexually, emotionally, and intellectually. (That may not be PC, but it is true nonetheless.) Therefore they may well work better besides others who are more likely to be at their same stage of developement.

uhmump95 Wrote:

niuhuskie84 Wrote:The ultimate goal is no longer to create well rounded intelligent students. It is to pass that test. Period. The funding depends on it.

You have nailed it. My wife's school is focusing now on teaching kids to pass tests in Feb, Mar and April. Teaching the various standardized tests are now a full time process.

I understand there has to be a method to hold schools accountable, but I do not think these standardized tests are the way to do it.

Bing Bing Bing....That is the biggest problem with schools today. Schools used to be about teaching people how to think. That doesn't happen any more. The goal is to pass the test and "memorize" how to pass the test.

NCLB does nothing but teach to the lowest denominator. In many districts the upper level classes have been cut because they need the funding to make sure they teach the lower level students at the rate deemed acceptable by NCLB. I have no problem with trying to hold teachers accountable, they just need to find another way to do it as NCLB doesn't hurt the teachers, it hurts the students.

I am not familiar with all the provisions of NCLB, but I have heard many people complain about the "teaching to the test".

I thought the test was instituted because many of our students were being handed diplomas for completing 12 years of school, but without having learned anything. When I was in school, I didn't like tests but I accepted the explanation that they were needed to ascertain what had or hadn't been learned. If we eliminate the test, what do you think should be substituted to insure that our graduates can read, write, and do basic math? If we kill NCLB, what should be substituted to insure that diplomas mean knowledge?

The only thing I can offer is vouchers. The schools teach to the test to avoid losing money. If they had to attract students to get money, they would have to improve the education offered to get the money. I know it goes against the grain for many people to have public tax money going to parochial or private schools, but if the goal is better educated students, then maybe that concern should be set aside.

If you don't like NCLB and you don't like vouchers, then give us your alternative and explain why it is better than the others.

niuhuskie84 Wrote:I agree. I hear a lot about this stuff, since my mom has worked in a school district for almost 40 years (not teaching, but shes still around it all). I hear about how much this program is failing on a daily basis. Now I'm not so sure NCLB is contributing to boys having trouble. But I do know it isnt helping them either. The ultimate goal is no longer to create well rounded intelligent students. It is to pass that test. Period. The funding depends on it.

I hear this whining frequently as well, and it's bull****. It almost always stems from the "educators". If this program is "failing on a daily basis" then explain what the hell was going on in the previous 40 years!

The ultimate goal of creating well rounded intelligent students? If schools were getting that done, no-one would have ever thought up NCLB in the first place.
Tell your Mom, that the FACT is, few teachers have any f'n clue what to do w/ an intelligent student, and they sure don't have any idea how to create them.

Few teachers know their subjects well enough to begin with. Most are more concerned w/ passing their agenda, rather than effective instruction. Many are so influcenced by post-modernism that they don't even believe in effective instruction.

Ironically, despite the bitching by public school teachers, standardized test-scores were rising since NCLB, until this year. I think this year may have been a change in the SATs (essay added?) but I'm not sure. At any rate, NCLB is a band-aid on a big problem. It isn't the solution, but it has helped a trifle. It's ironic and telling that the public schools are griping about ANYTHING that shows improvement.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:If you don't like NCLB and you don't like vouchers, then give us your alternative and explain why it is better than the others.

Amen. One other caveat, it can't just be, "Give us more money."

The Ohio Democrat candidate for governor (Ted Strickland) just stated in a debate that vouchers were "undemocratic". Once again, can you say "pandering to the NEA?"
How much MORE democratic can you get? It allows parents to VOTE for their schools, w/ their dollars. Good schools prosper, and they get to expand their influence. Bad schools wither and go away.

Anyway Strickland is leading in the polls, and I suspect he'll win. Watch Ohio plummet in education over the next few years.