A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Analysis and evaluation of the rationales for single-sex schooling. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The No Child Left Behind Act of 2006 legalized certain forms of single-sex public education in the U.S., with proponents arguing various benefits of this approach.
  • The chapter critiques five main justifications for single-sex schooling, highlighting that empirical evidence does not support these claims and suggesting improvements for coeducational settings.
  • Key arguments include the idea that benefits attributed to single-sex education are linked to other factors, questioning the role of biological sex in education, and acknowledging persistent sexism, ultimately advocating for beneficial practices to be applied in coed schools.

Article Abstract

Amendments passed as part of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2006 made some forms of single-sex (SS) public education legal in the United States. Proponents offer a host of arguments in favor of such schooling. This chapter identifies and evaluates five broad rationales for SS schooling. We conclude that empirical evidence fails to support proponents' claims but nonetheless suggests ways in which to improve coeducation. Specifically, we (a) show that the purported benefits of SS schooling arise from factors confounded with, but not causally linked to, single-sex composition; (b) challenge claims that biological sex is an effective marker of differences relevant to instruction; (c) argue that sexism on the part of teachers and peers persists in SS contexts; and (d) critique the notion that gender per se "disappears" in SS contexts. We also address societal implications of the use of sex-segregated education and conclude that factors found to be beneficial for students should be implemented within coeducational schools.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2014.05.002DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

analysis evaluation
4
evaluation rationales
4
rationales single-sex
4
schooling
4
single-sex schooling
4
schooling amendments
4
amendments passed
4
passed child
4
child left
4
left 2006
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!