single sex vs mixed schools

I'll preface this by saying that parents will typically argue for whatever school system they went through.

So if you went through mixed setting ,the chances are that you'll think that's the way forward. Same with school uniform debate.

In any event, the Department of Education aren't building any new schools that are single sex anymore so that's that.

Furthermore there's a few single sex that have amalgamated into mixed schools.

Really though nothing is going to be proactively done, the fee-charging schools have such a tradition of keeping tradition that it won't change.

It's a silly season debate which Newstalk are wheeling weekly out to get people to text in and cough up money.

Next week it'll be school uniforms.

Then heavy school bags.

Then reform of the leaving cert.

Then public sector pay rises.

Then "teachers should be teaching X in schools".

Then why we should abolish Irish.

Rinse and repeat "let us know what YOUUUU think, text us now on 53106"..

.

.

.

.

.

Texts cost 30c

Please stop the conflation of single sex schools with the promotion of misogyny (or misandry!). These throw away comments are lazy and uniformed.

"When teaching the SPHE course some years ago we talked a lot about that Belfast rugby trial and the WhatsApp messages. That sort of demeaning talk doesn't arise from a cultural vacuum. "

You do realise the accused went to mixed schools??

Other recent cases of attacks on female students by male students in the same school too.

The IT reports on research which shows that students in single-sex schools perform substantially better at reading, maths and science.

Of course, the researchers then tortured the data until it yielded the preferred results. It’s fair enough to make allowances for the students’ socio-economic backgrounds and teacher-pupil ratios but the researchers piled on other subjective “control variables” in order to reduce the gap to a level that allowed them to say there is “limited evidence around the relationship between attending a single-sex school and academic performance.” They are not embarrassed to turn that into these headlines

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/education/2023/02/22/single-sex-schools-provide-no-academic-advantage-study/

So many social science studies conclude that there is “no evidence to support [insert a belief that used to be common sense]”. OK, but were they really looking for that evidence?

I suspect that teenage boys benefit by being in class with girls because girls tend to be more studious at that age. Girls may suffer academically by sharing a class with a bunch of rowdy lads. Who knows what the social effects may be?

As I made clear,

My objection is to the mysterious other factors which make the differences in school performance disappear. In genuine research, the raw data would be presented and then relevant factors would be applied with clear explanations for each.

Instead, the process is reversed and we get straight to - Hey, Presto! - the “right” answer. Maybe the fault lies with the journalists but the researchers were more than willing to give them the story they wanted. Give us the raw data and then bring on your “controls”.

Incidentally, I am not a fan of single sex schools and, as I said, I think boys will benefit from mixed classes. I just can’t stomach this kind of “research” where the data is made to fit the researchers’ goal. (I should write a SF novel about a planet, far far away, where the inhabitants welcomed rigorous scientific research even when it disproved their favoured social theories.)

The ESRI have been running a huge longitudinal study of Growing Up in Ireland. A massive research effort which has yielded almost nothing of practical value, just lots of “we found no evidence for ….” . They are master of controlling their data!

Proves the point, I hadn't realised it was based on PISA performance just be reading the thread here. You'd be lead to believe that it was based on academic, JC LC performance . I'm reluctant to even read the article though as newspapers rarely give raw data or balanced points when it comes to Irish Education, they go for the sensation to get people talking.

In fairness, there is an open process to decide the patronage of any new school. Based primarily on local interest, basically they are usually mixed bacuse a single sex option is already available and the motivated parents tend to be the ones who want a change. It's not a nerfarious plan and extremely easy to find the details of it as opposed to just going with a one liner and asking "who voted for it" (the parents by the way, that's who)

The questions in the PISA are very similar to the new junior cycle, possibly intentionally. The science ones could be directly from it, and the forms you fill out as a school are very detailed so the data would be readily compared. I've never seen the dept come looking for the info PISA asks, even though you'd imagine it would be useful. Having been involved it's a pretty detailed process, not saying I don't have some issues.....but all stats has issues.

The study itself has some interesting parts, the gender gap was more interesting to me, that looks a strong result. But the number of variables in general is hard to take into account, though, in fairness, its one of the better studies I've seen, not that the standard is that high in general. At least they attempted to control for confounding variable, though apparently we could be doing a better job of teaching the concept in schools based on some of the media around this.

Paper is in an open source journal, link below.

https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3841

I wonder how this would all stack up when it cuts to the chase. i.e. LC CAO Points

An impressive riposte to Jennifer O’Connell in todays IT

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/2023/02/27/single-sex-schools-and-parental-choice/

I'm not sure what you are basing this on. Both single sex schools in the area I teach in would have significantly worse behaviour, especially regarding actual violence, than our mixed school. Huge issues with gang stuff from both girls and guys, mixed school is grand. Socioeconomic background again will indicate this far more than the gender mix or lack thereof.

Bad management makes anything bad, not just schools. The biggest effects on any kids are their parents and home stability and expectations. You can occasionally effect change outside of this when it's missing in schools but it will be the largest statistical driver. Even simple metrics like number of words by the time they enter primary have lifelong effects.

I don't know why everyone is even worried about this to be honest. The apetite is for mixed and all the new patronages show it, if/when it isn't then maybe it's worth a more in depth look. Either way if your kids is clever, diligent and capable they will likely do ok regardless of whether they sit beside Mary or John.

The fact schools are so much along socioeconomic lines in Dublin, thus subtly stratifying society should be more of a concern.

Single sex? There was no sex in school in my day!

No one is dictating anything. Patronage of new schools is quite literally a result of parental or future parental input. The process is online and done through an independent body. Given, historically most schools were single sex the apetite is for mixed.....that and the change of attitude to mixed schooling. Both types of schooling are generally available in an area, no one is shutting down single sex schools, some merge or change admissions but this is all done in consultation with all the stakeholders.

He very noticably said "de facto" policy.....not an actual policy. Do you have experience in the area of patronage, gave you sat on boards discussing this? Labour have tried to push state funded schools towards compulsory mixed but this is not law or anywhere near it. If a patron body wished to set up a single sex school in an area then there is no policy, circular or law prohibiting it. Have closely followed or been a part of patronage conversations for years, the strongest voices in the community tend to be from parents advocating for mixed schools. This is very noticable in the parents groups in the 4 districts currently in the process of consultation around changing patronage so any school in a area is mixed, multidenominational as that options isn't available, in large enough towns too in those cases.

Parents are generally moving towards mixed schooling, that's the choice being made. There is very little push for single sex schools. Hence the lack of new patronages. But there are lots of parents groups fighting tooth and nail to get non religious, mixed, multidenominational schools in their catchment, moreso with the new admissiona rules

I will also add it's a product of who is applying to run new schools and the provision of non religious options too at secondary and primary too but overwhelmingly people want their kids in mixed school. But no one at dept level is forcing this, and they don't have the law on their side to do so. Feel free to set up an approved patronage body to apply for single sex schools in any area, no one will stop you

Same as some of the conversations around Enoch Burke, I don't know anyone working in education who is massively bothered by it, certainly no one whose teaching I'd hold in any esteem. Same way having trans kids in a school is actually grand. Mostly schools have other things on their agendas that are more important

One labour TD, one with a reason to make statements that make the truth look in his parties favour, is not the Department of Education......who also don't actually decide on patronage.....again it's an external agency.

De facto in this case means by fact.....the dept haven't sanctioned a single sex school since 1998...that's not up for debate but there is absolutely no evidence this has been done as a policy of the department, de facto or not. I could just as easily say the government have a de facto policy to not give me the procurement for pencils......even if I've never applied to the contract.

If you can link a policy/circular here I'll happily look but otherwise you are dependent on the hyperbole of a man known for hyperbole making an angle for himself and publicising his own preference, clearly outlined in the recent bill from his party. One which failed by the way. Nothing is real in education unless it's in a circular and there don't spare them, sometimes multiple a day.

Can you give me an example of any area in which a patron or parents group won a majority support and we're refused patronage? You are arguing about something I really don't think you know much about, and anyone who's been through the process of deciding patronage or changing patronage would tell you that. No one is stopping single sex schools......and parental voice is huge. I've seen plenty of merges and changes in patronage down to very motivated parents groups......and fair play to them.

Not denied, they weren't the majority of votes, I assume you are talking about the one that went to DDETB? Eriu? Only 3rd to 6th class parents of primary's in the catchment are elegible to vote. There would be 20+ primary schools in the area, none of which would be under the IFI patronage so they'd be very hard pressed to get anywhere near a majority. Also worth noting that that patronage, IFI is under the clonskeagh mosque, the imam there wouldnt always see eye to eye with the mosque leader in D15. There would be many Islamic people in that area who wouldn't subscribe to that form of Islam and their Imam would have had very close ties with a number of schools from my experience, though from a decade ago. Money might have been poured into the campaign but parents in primary are very savvy and they are extremely organized from my experience, I've had parents quiz on reports online in fair detail.

The IFI is lucky to still have the right to patronage too, the report from the North City primary was sobering, to this day the worst report of any school in the country published. If parents googled the patron body (and they would) and learned that ten years ago they refused to teach music to primary school kids on religious grounds and had not implemented any safeguarding policies it might have given pause for thought.

Parents organisations have never had more power in education than they do now and that's as it should be. It's unhelpful to suggest that is not the case and sows divisions where there doesn't need to be any.

On a practical level, in a typical small town in Ireland there is typically a girls convent, a boys CBS and if the town is big enough a vocational school (usually mixed, often skewing towards more boys). Two to three small schools in the town, duplicating lots of resources (three principals, three deputy principals, often no more than 500 students between them), and not able to offer the full range of subjects in any school.

I work in a school which was an amalgamation of a scenario similar to the above. Boys had woodwork, metalwork, tech drawing, accounting, physics. In the girls school they had art, music, home ec, business, phys/chem. Other subjects like geography, history, biology available in both. When all three were amalgamated into one community college, the full range of subjects and new subjects were available to all.

I can see the logic in not wanting to establish new single sex schools... if a campaign was successful in an area for a girls school, well what's the knock on effect from that? Does the local school (maybe full to capacity, hence the campaign for a new school), get overwhelmed with applications from boys and effectively turn it into a boys school, or still be mixed but the numbers end up extremely lopsided? Or do you end up having to establish a new boys school also, if the existing school is full to capacity and boys are not going to be accommodated in the girls school. How viable is a new single sex school to provide a wide range of subjects?

I'll make this as simple as possible......show me a vote, conducted by the independent agency governing patronage, which asks 3rd to 6th class parents what they would like new a patronage to be, where a single sex school was denied after winning a majority or in fact a Muslim one at that? Labour aren't mad about religious schools either and they are still getting patronages.

Or point me specifically to a circular or law that would stop a single sex patronage applying for one. You're readings into the comments of one TD (not in government with a vested interest) are not department policy. There is absolutely nothing stopping you applying for patron status, throwing your name in the hat for the next round of schools and appealing to parents. If you win a majority and the department refuse you then you'll have proven your point but I don't think you would get a majority in any catchment. But barring this you are speculating on what would happen in this scenario and so is AOR.

And that's not what I said about the Muslim school, I said I had only glanced at the patronage report at the time and couldn't find it now but based on demographics they would not be anywhere close to a majority in that area from my own experience of education in that area and have an ideological schism anyway.

How do you think patronage is currently decided?

Blockbuster didn't go bust because there was a conspiracy not to buy videos ....but because people didn't want them. From my experience of education and the parents involved most want mixed education hence the new patronages being mixed.

Exactly. This is not about a majority, this is about parental choice. But it turns out that parents can have any school they want so long as it is mixed-gender.

No single-sex school has been approved since 1998 and none will be approved in the future.  

am_zarathustra is very anxious we should understand that this is not a "policy" even if it walks like a policy and quacks like a policy and the Labour Party think it's a policy and RTÉ assume it's a policy and no one else in the media seems to care whether it's a policy or not, even those in the media who were pushing gussied-up research "proving" that the actual academic advantages of single-sex school is an illusion caused by ... well, as many other factors as they could shake a stick at.

am_zarathustra says the Labour Party Bill (forcing single-sex schools to integrate) has failed. I wonder why they didn't simply propose a Bill to block new single-sex schools? At least that would be a democratic decision, not a non-policy with total deniability.

I think the best thing for you to do is to go through the process and try and apply for patronage for a new schools, win a majority of support from 3rd-6th class parents and then show that the department still grants patronage to another body. Otherwise this is just speculation. I find it's better to deal in facts than speculating as to why no single sex schools have been sanctioned, we may as well speculate why no new Jewish schools have been sactioned and discuss the "policy" banning jewish schools, patenetly not a reasonable arguement. Unless you can produce evidence to the contrary, and as far as any assessments I have read, this is a results of parental choice.

The new Labour bill failed, as would another one blocking it directly in the morning. And if the pendulum swings and single sex schooling became what a majority wanted I'd assume Cheist would have no issue pivoting, and they should be allowed. I wouldnt be comfortable with an outright ban. Parental choice is massively important, it really is disengenious to suggest otherwise. In the processes I've been through or observed up close the real subtleties of non versus multi denominational became a serious conversation point for parents, these decisions are not lightly taken. The process is open and, based on the assessments I've read (and I have a professional interest in this so I generally try and read them as they come out) no school has not been awarded to the majority parental choice patronage.

What is you own experience of the patrongage system that makes you so sure of your position?

@Treppen Existing schools in areas will have people loyal to them for sure, especially if they are well run. I've no issue with single sex schooling, as I said before I had a brilliant experience in my own single sex school and have worked in a few but they are good down to legacy, well run managements beget more and subsequent well run managements. I know from previous discussion here that we both have expeience of the contrary too!! I'm not sure the same appetite would be there for an unknown single sex school. I've generally found most parents just want the best school for their kid, this is often the single sex school in large market towns especially.

You've been wasting my time and yours by repeatedly denying the existence of a policy against single-sex schools.

The Department of Education's patronage website has an FAQ about new schools which sets out the policy in the plainest terms

So who's a spoofer now? Not Aodhán Ó Riordán T.D., Labour Party Education Spokesperson.

So I revert to my original question is - who decided on this policy?

Not the Oireachtas, it seems, because it is not in the Education Act.

Was this policy even announced or was it just slipped into some obscure documents? No one here knew anything about it until I questioned it.

And is there a plan to create a surreptious policy which would integrate the existing single-sex schools, now that the Labour Party's effort of legislate for this has failed?

Amalgamation is terrible argument for co-ed as it is essentially a plea for larger class sizes. Co-ed is already the overwhelming majority. T.D., Labour Party Education Spokesperson, Aodhán Ó Riordán recently said that equality is more important than choice. This really sums up the co-ed push. It is about reducing choice. Making us all the same.

There isnt a lot of savings there. Especially if you build a new building. Always surprises me how the left turns into fiscal hawks when it gives them a chance to control people.

Ah hang on, am_zarathustra says there is no real demand for single-sex schooling and that's why no such school has been approved since 1998. I'm sure there was a very full and open consultation in which the schools parents expressed enthusiasm for this amalgamation. Why then would parents pull their kids out of this brand-new co-ed schools and bus them to single-sex schools in another town?!

As for the academic performance - sure hasn't it been proved here by means of higher maths and graphs that there is no difference academically, once you allow for all the factors you can shake a coefficient at (lies, damned lies and headlines!)

That can happen in any school with poor management. Where I am, there were students getting buses to the next town over, 10 miles away to attend the co-ed school towards the end of the life of the previous three schools. They wanted a better run school, better facilities, more subject choice. Once the schools amalgamated, that stopped almost overnight. The students that were going to the next town over continued to do so, presumably because they were happy in that school, but other students did not follow them.