I ran funding systems for schools in Victoria through the eighties and nineties. It coincided with the "girl friendly" changes in education which swept the western world through that time. Curricula and teaching methods were altered based on girls learning needs with no consideration given to boys at all. At the same time our boys technical schools were gradually shut down as well. Part of the reason for their existing was an understanding that many boys need a more active, hands on approach to learning. An unexpected consequence was breaking the pathway from schools through apprenticeships and into trades, something we've never adequately replaced.
At this time about three generations of boys have grown up hearing little but spite and venom towards their sex and our schools are one of the primary contributors. Myself and others warned at the outset of a grim future for boys in education but were shouted down as misogynists. All I can do now is tell everyone "I told you so".
I highly recommend "The War Against Boys" by Christina Hoff Summers which describes the North American situation, remarkably similar to our own.
This reminds of the 90s when schools tried to drug boys who were "acting up" when they were simply bored with the curriculum forced upon them by the overwhelmingly female teachers
Boys were judged on a girl's standard of behavior. Forcing young men to read feminist literature along with Shakespeare plays doesn't end well.
Is there actual data showing that controlling for other variables, coed schooling does worse than sex-specific? That's what it would take to get me (or most) to care.
Good question: the data that shows single-sex schools do better is generally from the single-sex schools themselves, so not an unbiassed source. I'll look into it: but ultimately it should be about the choice. Some kids will do better in one school, some in another, and parents should have genuine choice, not merely the option to fight over a very limited number of places in private schools that only the wealthy can afford.
Each time we see something that contradicts 'co-ed is the only way', shout it from the rooftops. For instance, in the recent HSC results I believe North Sydney Boys overtook James Ruse (which went co-ed in the late 70's) as the top state school, and 8 of the top 10 (sans James Ruse and Baulkham Hills High) are single-sex schools. Tell everybody, every friend, family member, comments section. And don't hesitate to show how this hurts girls - more girls schools has to also mean more boys schools, for the reasons I explain.
I ran funding systems for schools in Victoria through the eighties and nineties. It coincided with the "girl friendly" changes in education which swept the western world through that time. Curricula and teaching methods were altered based on girls learning needs with no consideration given to boys at all. At the same time our boys technical schools were gradually shut down as well. Part of the reason for their existing was an understanding that many boys need a more active, hands on approach to learning. An unexpected consequence was breaking the pathway from schools through apprenticeships and into trades, something we've never adequately replaced.
At this time about three generations of boys have grown up hearing little but spite and venom towards their sex and our schools are one of the primary contributors. Myself and others warned at the outset of a grim future for boys in education but were shouted down as misogynists. All I can do now is tell everyone "I told you so".
I highly recommend "The War Against Boys" by Christina Hoff Summers which describes the North American situation, remarkably similar to our own.
Western society has destroyed male spaces and continue to remove males from society. The results will be disastrous.
Thanks Greg, I've heard of that but haven't looked into it yet, I'll bump it up the priorities.
This reminds of the 90s when schools tried to drug boys who were "acting up" when they were simply bored with the curriculum forced upon them by the overwhelmingly female teachers
Boys were judged on a girl's standard of behavior. Forcing young men to read feminist literature along with Shakespeare plays doesn't end well.
Is there actual data showing that controlling for other variables, coed schooling does worse than sex-specific? That's what it would take to get me (or most) to care.
Good question: the data that shows single-sex schools do better is generally from the single-sex schools themselves, so not an unbiassed source. I'll look into it: but ultimately it should be about the choice. Some kids will do better in one school, some in another, and parents should have genuine choice, not merely the option to fight over a very limited number of places in private schools that only the wealthy can afford.
The problem is that single sex is not possible in all countries. In Spain is almost forbidden.
I never knew that! I would have thought Spain had a lot of religious schools. How times change.
100% agreed. The question is how to solve this?
Each time we see something that contradicts 'co-ed is the only way', shout it from the rooftops. For instance, in the recent HSC results I believe North Sydney Boys overtook James Ruse (which went co-ed in the late 70's) as the top state school, and 8 of the top 10 (sans James Ruse and Baulkham Hills High) are single-sex schools. Tell everybody, every friend, family member, comments section. And don't hesitate to show how this hurts girls - more girls schools has to also mean more boys schools, for the reasons I explain.