Reducing Sexism in Schools: Is Single-Sex Schooling a Solution?

• In Event: The State of Single-Sex Schooling: Theoretical, Empirical, Methodological, and Legal Issues

Abstract

Among the rationales for single-sex schooling is the argument that such schools are effective for reducing sexism in educational settings (Lee & Bryk, 1986; Salonome, 2002). That is, single-sex school environments are often described as safe havens for youth to explore nontraditional gender interests and expertise. If true, such schools would be valuable. Students who are surrounded by teachers and peers who endorse rigid gender stereotypes show a host of non-optimal outcomes.

Is single-sex schooling associated with reduced sexism in educational environments? In our presentation, we discuss ways to conceptualize and investigate this question, and review empirical evidence that helps to answer it. Specifically, we (a) describe pathways by which single-sex schooling may affect youth’s gender role development, (b) present an overview of theoretical and empirical work within psychological science that advances our understanding of environmental conditions that produce gender stereotyping and prejudice, and (c) discuss the implications of this work for educational policy.

We begin by presenting a conceptual analysis of the causal pathways by which single-sex classrooms and schools are likely to affect children’s gender attitudes and behavior. We argue that single-sex schooling has effects at: (1) the immediate or micro-level environment (i.e., experiences that youth have in classrooms), (2) the school or macro-level environment (i.e., experiences that youth have within school-related spaces and events, such as parties, dances, and athletic contests), and (3) the societal level (i.e., experiences that youth have in seeing the pervasive use of gender to organize and label public institutions).

We next discuss psychological research on the consequences of separating children on the basis of gender. We review work stemming from three theoretical lines of inquiry: contact theory, intergroup theory, and group dynamics theory. An enormous literature indicates that positive intergroup contact promotes out-group liking and reduces stereotyping (Pettigrew & Troop, 2006). Most of this literature concerns racial and ethnic groups, but new work suggests that group processes concerning gender operate similarly. Thus, gender segregation may facilitate gender bias among youth.

Bigler & Liben (2007) argued that segregation affects social stereotyping via three additional processes. Developmental Intergroup Theory posits that gender segregation produces stereotyping and prejudice because it increases the psychological salience of gender, which, in turn, triggers classification of individuals by gender, and encourages children to construct beliefs about gender differences and develop gender biases. Several recent studies provide empirical support for these claims (Hillard & Liben, 2010; Waxman, 2010).

Finally, Developmental Subjective Group Dynamics theory (DSGD; Abrams & Rutland, 2008) posits that, as children’s age, they develop an increasingly sophisticated understanding of group norms related to inclusion and exclusion, resulting in greater valuing of ingroup loyalty and favoritism. Experience with segregation may promote these processes by providing concrete experience with group-based exclusion.

Empirical data related to these three lines of theorizing will be reviewed, and those issues that remain to be clarified will be highlight. Finally, we will discuss implications of these lines of work for single-sex schooling policy and practice.

Authors

• Rebecca S. Bigler, The University of Texas - Austin

• Lynn S. Liben, The Pennsylvania State University