In the past couple of years, a new trend has surfaced among modern parents; sending their children to single-sex schools. I was very skeptical of this idea, so I decided to scour the web for people’s justifications behind their decision. Apparently, parents these days believe that such schools are better than co-ed schools because of the following reasons:

• They provide a more relaxing environment 
• They have a more specific curriculum 
• Student cliques are less common 
• They help in breaking gender stereotypes 
• They eliminate competition between boys and girls

Now, this might all sound attractive in theory, but I believe that none of these “advantages” are applicable in real life. The first argument states that students will be able to comfortably voice their opinions in a classroom. But this argument is seriously flawed in the sense that a more relaxing environment in school won’t prepare students for most real-world scenarios. How will a person coming out of a single-sex school be able to effectively interact with the opposite gender, say, in a corporate setting?

The next argument for gender-isolated education is that such schools have a more tailored curriculum for a single gender in areas such as literature. In my opinion, this will unfailingly promote gender alienation by limiting exposure to how the opposite gender’s mind works. Sure, female students will be able to relate to better feminist sentiments, but that doesn’t mean male students shouldn’t have the opportunity to appreciate a strong-willed protagonist in a story. Male students can also certainly benefit from having deep discussions about a female character.

Another school of thought opines that since student cliques will be less common in single-sex schools, making it will be easier for students to fit in. That in itself seems to be a vast generalization of single-sex schools. The general attitude and friendliness of students vary vastly from school to school, depending upon each individual student, and hence cannot be used as a valid indicator. As a kid, I changed schools every three to four years, and each school ended up being a completely different experience for me. 

Apart from this, breaking gender stereotypes seems to be a minimal advantage as compared to the disadvantages single-sex education harbors. Moreover, separating students by gender is not the answer to ending gender stereotypes, as real life cannot exist in a vacuum. Measures like spreading proper awareness and encouraging both genders to pursue unconventional occupations will be far more effective in the long run. 

Lastly, eliminating competition between male and female students can have neither positive nor negative outcomes. While researches show that boys and girls, on average, excel in acquiring different skills, single-sex schools will subconsciously teach adolescent minds that they cannot outperform the opposite gender. Healthy, spirited competition can help bring out the best in both genders, and nothing good ever came out of “eliminating competition”.

On the other hand, co-ed schools have a range of benefits, such as improving students’ people skills, healthy competition, familiarisation with the opposite sex, a sense of equality among students, and many others. Therefore, in my book, single-sex schools are a no-go.

There’s a popular saying I read online that goes like this: If it’s not broken, don’t try to fix it. People who practice today’s “modern” parenting techniques might have a lot to learn from this quote. In conclusion, the point I’m trying to get across is that change should not be confused with progress. Every change implemented should be analysed with logic beforehand.