Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I switched my daughter from a co-ed to an all-girl school in 6th grade and it was the best decision. The empowering and teaching focusing on girls and that they can be whatever they want just works so well at this difficult age. Hard core athletics, art, STEM, debate, clubs, etc... It is not girly at all. My daughter was doing robotics. A class NO girls would sign up for because in a co-ed school it would be 90% boys. It gives girls a chance to try anything and everything without worry. They build confident women. There are girls that don't have to have single sex. That will raise their hand over a boy or not care about boy/girl dynamics but ages 7-10th grade have a really hard time with that.

For boys, my guess is 2nd-8th grade would benefit. When there could be more movement and hands on teaching. They have a hard time sitting still. I don't know from experience but that is my guess.

So lets see. You want boys and girls separated from grades 2-8 ( to benefit boys), and then separated from 7-10 ( to benefit girls). So, coed schools for K-1 and 11-12. Single sex for 2-7? IF single sex from 7-10 is good for girls but not boys, where do boys go to school? What the hell are you talking about?

You appear to need a single room of the padded variety.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I switched my daughter from a co-ed to an all-girl school in 6th grade and it was the best decision. The empowering and teaching focusing on girls and that they can be whatever they want just works so well at this difficult age. Hard core athletics, art, STEM, debate, clubs, etc... It is not girly at all. My daughter was doing robotics. A class NO girls would sign up for because in a co-ed school it would be 90% boys. It gives girls a chance to try anything and everything without worry. They build confident women. There are girls that don't have to have single sex. That will raise their hand over a boy or not care about boy/girl dynamics but ages 7-10th grade have a really hard time with that.

For boys, my guess is 2nd-8th grade would benefit. When there could be more movement and hands on teaching. They have a hard time sitting still. I don't know from experience but that is my guess.

So lets see. You want boys and girls separated from grades 2-8 ( to benefit boys), and then separated from 7-10 ( to benefit girls). So, coed schools for K-1 and 11-12. Single sex for 2-7? IF single sex from 7-10 is good for girls but not boys, where do boys go to school? What the hell are you talking about?

You are an idiot. She is giving her opinion on where it might matter to either sex the most. How do you not see that? There will always be co-ed and single sex schools. There is a CHOICE. The PP was saying when it might make a difference to consider one over the other? Some kids it won't matter for, others it will. Geez

Anonymous wrote:I switched my daughter from a co-ed to an all-girl school in 6th grade and it was the best decision. The empowering and teaching focusing on girls and that they can be whatever they want just works so well at this difficult age. Hard core athletics, art, STEM, debate, clubs, etc... It is not girly at all. My daughter was doing robotics. A class NO girls would sign up for because in a co-ed school it would be 90% boys. It gives girls a chance to try anything and everything without worry. They build confident women. There are girls that don't have to have single sex. That will raise their hand over a boy or not care about boy/girl dynamics but ages 7-10th grade have a really hard time with that.

For boys, my guess is 2nd-8th grade would benefit. When there could be more movement and hands on teaching. They have a hard time sitting still. I don't know from experience but that is my guess.

So lets see. You want boys and girls separated from grades 2-8 ( to benefit boys), and then separated from 7-10 ( to benefit girls). So, coed schools for K-1 and 11-12. Single sex for 2-7? IF single sex from 7-10 is good for girls but not boys, where do boys go to school? What the hell are you talking about?

Please quit with the sex/gender tangent. It is littering a good discussion with pointless and hyper technical asides. We all know exactly what OP meant. Debate over sex/gender is even worse than bickering over obscure grammar rules. Please stop.

Single-sex schools that mandate single gender behavior (e.g., uniforms) are single gender, no?

^^^although actually, as a PP points out, some of the women's colleges are interested in what's in the applicant's underwear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
[b]Aside: please don't call it "single gender education."[\b]

Not the OP, but why not?

np here. because it is inaccurate. it's single-sex education. Sex is "do you have a penis or a vagina." Gender is "do you wear a dress or pants." There is no such thing as single-gender education.

Do applications include an attestation about what's in the applicant's underwear? Boy/girl is gender, not sex.

I switched my daughter from a co-ed to an all-girl school in 6th grade and it was the best decision. The empowering and teaching focusing on girls and that they can be whatever they want just works so well at this difficult age. Hard core athletics, art, STEM, debate, clubs, etc... It is not girly at all. My daughter was doing robotics. A class NO girls would sign up for because in a co-ed school it would be 90% boys. It gives girls a chance to try anything and everything without worry. They build confident women. There are girls that don't have to have single sex. That will raise their hand over a boy or not care about boy/girl dynamics but ages 7-10th grade have a really hard time with that.

For boys, my guess is 2nd-8th grade would benefit. When there could be more movement and hands on teaching. They have a hard time sitting still. I don't know from experience but that is my guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
[b]Aside: please don't call it "single gender education."[\b]

Not the OP, but why not?

np here. because it is inaccurate. it's single-sex education. Sex is "do you have a penis or a vagina." Gender is "do you wear a dress or pants." There is no such thing as single-gender education.

Uh oh. I wore a dress to work today, but am now wearing pants that I wore out to dinner tonight. Now I'm really confused.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The conventional wisdom is that single sex is better for boys in the middle school time period (wiggliness, inability to sit still/focus as much) and better for girls in high school (self-silencing, boys dominating class discussion).

As others have said, much depends on your child's personality and of course on the specific school and what they do with the single sex element.

I'm just starting to consider an all boys school for my son who will be entering K next year. He's socially immature but academically ready.
I was thinking that if I could find an all boys class he might be on par with the other boys and not compared against more mature girls.

To my knowledge there are not any boys schools that start in K.

Mater Dei in Bethesda starts in 1st grade. The Heights in 3rd, St Anslems in 6th, Landon in 3rd, St Albans in 4th, Georgetown Prep in 9th and Gonzaga in 9th.

We went to one of the above schools and found it very beneficial for DS. It gave the boys a chance to act like themselves in the classroom and not try to impress the girls especially if it was something that would be perceived as not cool. (art, music, understanding history etc)


There was plenty of time and opportunities for the boys to interact with girls outside of school.

I'm looking at Boys Latin in Balt. It's not ideal to put him in school in Balt but like you listed above, there doesn't seem to be any options in the DC metro area. I really want him to go to K on time and I just believe that he will be more successful in an all boy classroom

Check out Gilman, too.

As a parent of only girls, I believe that an all-girls environment is essential in high school and beneficial in middle school. The single gender environment keeps the girls from being drowned out by the boys and also removes the distraction and conflict (among girls competing for attention) when boys are present.

My daughters attended formals with boys from several private schools (Gonzaga, Prep, Landon, Potomac, STA, and public schools). I was most impressed by the boys from all male schools. They just seemed more polished to me.

I think it totally depends on the individual. I went to a small co-ed elementary school - had a perfectly fine experience. Went to an all-girls high school and honestly feel that it was a time frame that changed my personality. I developed a self-confidence I did not have before in a secure, challenging and empowering environment. I'm sure just as many women feel the same and just as many women do not remember it nearly as fondly. My brother and husband went to all-boys schools (different schools, different cities actually.) Both had good experiences at the time but my brother has maintained contacts with classmates far more than my husband. Neither seems to think there was an academic benefit for them personally but I know others who do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The conventional wisdom is that single sex is better for boys in the middle school time period (wiggliness, inability to sit still/focus as much) and better for girls in high school (self-silencing, boys dominating class discussion).

As others have said, much depends on your child's personality and of course on the specific school and what they do with the single sex element.

I'm just starting to consider an all boys school for my son who will be entering K next year. He's socially immature but academically ready.
I was thinking that if I could find an all boys class he might be on par with the other boys and not compared against more mature girls.

To my knowledge there are not any boys schools that start in K.

Mater Dei in Bethesda starts in 1st grade. The Heights in 3rd, St Anslems in 6th, Landon in 3rd, St Albans in 4th, Georgetown Prep in 9th and Gonzaga in 9th.

We went to one of the above schools and found it very beneficial for DS. It gave the boys a chance to act like themselves in the classroom and not try to impress the girls especially if it was something that would be perceived as not cool. (art, music, understanding history etc)


There was plenty of time and opportunities for the boys to interact with girls outside of school.

I'm looking at Boys Latin in Balt. It's not ideal to put him in school in Balt but like you listed above, there doesn't seem to be any options in the DC metro area. I really want him to go to K on time and I just believe that he will be more successful in an all boy classroom

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
[b]Aside: please don't call it "single gender education."[\b]

Not the OP, but why not?

np here. because it is inaccurate. it's single-sex education. Sex is "do you have a penis or a vagina." Gender is "do you wear a dress or pants." There is no such thing as single-gender education.

Many women's colleges offer admissions to MtF transexuals. I would describe that as single gender education.

Most girl's schools at the K - 12 level are actually single sex, not single gender.

the issue of how women's colleges deal with transgender is far, far from settled. Most of the ones I know of (and I went to a seven sisters school) go case-by-case, and it usually results in their being both transmen and transwomen on campus.