Gender imbalances in schools is a pressing issue which has been faced with investigation from parents, school administrators, and economists alike. Many researchers and educators across the country have found that co-ed schools generally result in the underperformance of boys in the classroom, and women tend to get fewer professorships in academia. How do we tackle the factors that skew how children and adults fare in their studies? Some think that same sex schools are the best way to avoid this inequality and gender divide in learning, arguing that those schools adapt to an individual gender’s method of learning, instead of making a school with the same standards for both genders, where the school adapts to the students. Others argue that same-sex schools do not prepare students for a world where they will have to live and work in an environment with both men and women, with the same work standards and expectations for both genders. Members of the WFS community and the community of Wilmington hold views on both sides of a controversial topic such as this.

     From the students interviewed from same sex schools, overall they believe the education is  favorable to co-ed schools. A student attending Salesianum, Bryce Wallace ’18, says, “I find it easier to focus. It is easier to learn because of less distractions, and the teachers can focus their teaching and their curriculum on the male mind, because we all think pretty similarly.” According to Wallace, single gender learning conditions are beneficial because the program is made specifically for how boys tend to learn, through activity and movement. This is efficient, compared to co-ed schools that offer a standard for both genders, which has been proven to make learning more difficult for boys. Similarly, another student from Sallies, Paul O’Donnell ’16, says, “Some pretty important advantages are that the teachers are not as strict as they would be at a co-ed school, but a serious disadvantage would have to be the social aspect. Without the girls, we lose important social skills and life skills that allow kids our age to eventually function and thrive in society.” This reveals the other side of same sex education: the fact that eventually boys and girls must coexist in society, and high school is an important time to learn these skills as well.

      Parents of these students are generally very happy with the effect it has on their children’s education as well. Gretchen McDonnell, a parent of two boys at St. Edmond’s Academy, states, “Single gender schools affect learning because they understand how different genders need a specific way to learn.” For example, girls tend to learn math and science better through language, and boys tend to learn better through movement and activity. McDonnell also says that “some other advantages of single gender learning are that there seem to be fewer gender expectations. For example, pink is not treated as just a girls color, and boys are encouraged to participate in the arts and drama. It allows my boys to be who they will become as opposed to being shaped, stressed, or pressured into what a boy should be.” McDonnell sheds light on the fact that single gender learning not only can benefit students in the classroom, but also can be beneficial in shaping who they are as a person.

      Amidst our own community, there is a presence of single-gender learning as well. For years there has been an all-girls French class, taught by Bradey Bulk, because no other boy signed up for the class.Jayna Jones ’17, a student in this class, says, “I’ve had this gender imbalance in my French class since 6th grade, and this year was the first year that we’ve had a boy in the class. So in general I’ve always been comfortable in that learning environment, but I think it takes away the male perspective that we can’t speak for when we have discussions. So at times we’ll find ourselves turning to Arthur (the only boy in the class), and it’s not really fair for him to represent a whole gender.”

         Single gender classes can often be a more efficient way of learning when the education is focused on the needs or preferences of one group of people. Bulk states, “The atmosphere allowed me to choose themes that would perhaps be of more interest to girls over boys, and as such, I think the girls felt more free to express their true thoughts and feelings. I am not convinced that the simple fact of having an ‘imbalance’ of genders in the class necessarily prevents one group from learning or participating. A lot of that depends on intangible qualities of the student such as personality, motivation, interest in the subject, engagement, etc, and the classroom management style of the teacher.”

     From the perspectives of students, parents, and teachers about single-gender education, most people view the method as a highly beneficial approach to education. Although single gender learning in the classroom can be narrow-minded and restrict students’ social skills, the benefits are significant. Single-gender learning allows a specialized curriculum for each gender’s needs, a higher level of comfort and participation in class, and fewer gender expectations. Overall, it comes down to the decision of the student and parents of whether or not single-gender learning is right for them.