Author: Ali Kocak 1
1International Black Sea University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Abstract: Many studies (Malik & Mirza, 2014; O’Neill, 2011; Daniels et al., 2009; Murphy, 2008; Hughes, 2007) conclude that there are numerous advantages of single-sex schooling especially for gifted, minority and economically disadvantaged students. Both boys and girls positively get affected by single-sex educational environment; while boys can express themselves comfortably in arts and theatre, and girls’ performance in mathematics and science subject has significantly improved (Martin & Beese, 2016; Leder, 2004). Both freed from opposite sex stereotype and intention of impressing opposite sex in educational process (Hughes, 2007). Past researches conclude (Murphy, 2008) that single-sex schooling also contributes positively for character building and moral development of students compared to co-educational schooling. The teachers who are the key players in educational process are varied in opinion about single-sex education (Sari, 2017; Spielhagen, 2011). The present study was carried out in the Suleyman Demirel University located in Kazakhstan. It was designed to find out the differences in academic performance of undergraduate degree programme students coming from single-sex and coeducational schools. Secondary source data was used for the analysis. Academic records of 8636 students were retrieved from the university management information system. This number of students were comprised of students who took admission from 2006-2007 academic year and graduated or left uncompleted. This number also includes students who are currently continuing the programme. Both descriptive and inferential analysis were applied. The study concludes that students from single-sex school took admission with significantly higher university entrance score. Students of single-sex schools were also granted significantly more government tuition fee waiver compared to counterparts. Hence, over the years the decrease in academic performance of single-sex students can be observed, graduated single-sex students had higher grand average compared to currently pursuing single-sex students. Moreover, even after taking admission higher score the grand average of currently pursuing single-sex students equalled (even slightly less) to students of coeducational schools. Female students from single-sex schools significantly took more admission in science and engineering disciplines compared to female students of co-educational schools.
Keywords: Single-Sex Schooling, Coeducational Schooling, Academic Performance of University Students
Brutsaert, H. (2006). Gender-role identity and perceived peer group acceptance among early adolescents in Belgian mixed and single-sex schools. Gender and Education, 18(6), November 2006, 635–649. doi: 10.1080/09540250600980204.
Cable, K. E., & Spradlin, T. E. (2008). Single-Sex education in the 21st century. New York: Doubleday.
Ganley, C. M., Vasilyeva, M., & Dulaney, A. (2014). Spatial ability mediates the gender difference in middle school students’ science performance. Child Development, 85(4), 1419–1432.
Gurian, M., Stevens, K., & Daniels, P. (2009). Single-Sex classrooms are succeeding. In Michael Gurian (Ed.) Successful Single-Sex Classrooms: A practical guide to teaching boys & girls separately. Jossey-Bass.
Hughes, T. A. (2006). The advantages of single-sex education. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 23(2), 5-15.
Leder, G. (2004). Gender differences among gifted students: Contemporary views. High Ability Studies, 15(1). Carfax Publishing.
Lee, V. E., & Bryk, A. S. (1986). Effects of single-sex secondary schools on student achievement and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 381-395.
Lee, V. E., & Marks, H. M. (1990). Sustained effects of the single-sex secondary school experience on attitudes, Behaviors, and values in college. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 578–592.
Mael, F., Alonso, A., Gibson, D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M. (2005). Single-sex versus coeducational schooling: A systematic review. U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development: Doc # 2005-01.
Mael, F., Smith, M., Alonso, A., Rogers, K., & Gibson, D. (2004). Theoretical arguments for and against single-sex schools: A critical analysis of the explanations. United States Department of Education.
Malik, R., & Mirza, M. (2014). Gender differential academic achievement of students in single-sex and coeducational primary schools in Pakistan. Bulletin of Education and Research, 36(1), 1-14.
Martin, J., & Beese, J. A. (2016). Pink is for girls: sugar and spice and everything nice—A case of single-sex education. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 19(4), 86-101. doi: 10.1177/1555458916664762.
Murphy, M. (2008). Moral development in single-sex schools: A review of the research. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Association for Moral Education. University of Notre Dame.
Murphy, P., & Ivinson, G. (2000). Construction of knowledge, social identities and pedagogy in single and mixed sex groupings. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans.
Prendergast, M., & O’Donoghue, J. (2014). Influence of gender, single-sex and co-educational schooling on students’ enjoyment and achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(8). 1115–1130. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2014.904530
Sari, M. (2017). Teachers’ Views on Co-education: Co-education or Single-sex Education? Acta Didactica Napocensia, 10(3), 35-44.
Sax, L. (2005). Why gender matters: What parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York: Doubleday.
Spielhagen, F. R. (2011). “It all depends…”: Middle School Teachers Evaluate Single-Sex Classes. In Micki M. Caskey (Ed.), RMLE Online Research in Middle Level Education, 34(7).
Spielhofer, T., O’Donnell, L., Bruton, T., Schagen, S., & Schagen, I. (2002). The impact of school size and single-sex education on performance. LGA Research Report, 33. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies
ISSN 2520-0968 (Online), ISSN 2409-1294 (Print), June 2019, Vol.5, No.4
Copyright © 2014 by Tishk International University, Developed and Designed by RAS Groups and M. Albay (IU Web Office Manager)
replica rolex is among the most international greatest perplexing watch survey of the brand. Put to use fake watches during the world-wide industry is also extremely well known.Customers from all of areas of life really like breitling replica watches. The initial financial investment valuation belongs to the benefits associated with best replica watches.