Single-Sex School and Co-Ed School Essay Example for Free

Single-Sex School and Co-Ed School Essay Girls are far more likely to thrive, get GCSEs and stay in education if they go to a single-sex school, according to new research, which reveals pupils who are struggling academically when they start secondary school reap the biggest rewards of girls-only schooling. The analysis of the GCSE scores of more than 700,000 girls taught in the state sector concludes that those at girls schools consistently made more progress than those in co-ed secondaries. The fact that pupils with the lowest test scores when they started secondary made the biggest leap in girls school will reopen the debate about whether more children should have access to a single-sex education in order to drive up results. The number of girls schools has dwindled in the state sector since the 1970s and has been dropping more recently among private schools, as more and more parents demand co-ed schools. Only 221,000 girls and 160,000 boys are now taught in state single sex secondaries out of a total school population of more than 3. 5 million. The research, conducted on behalf of the Good Schools Guide, looked at the contextually value added scores for every girl who took GCSEs in the state sector between 2005 and 2007. Grammar schools were excluded. The government introduced value added scores to rate the progress pupils make between the end of primary school and GCSEs taking into account their socio-economic backgrounds. Of the 71,286 girls who sat GCSEs in single-sex schools over the three-year period, on average all did better than predicted on the basis of their end of primary Sats results. By comparison, of the 647,942 who took exams in mixed-sex schools, 20% did worse than expected. In the value added score, in which a zero score indicates a child achieving the GCSE results expected on the basis of their Sats results at 11, the lowest 10% achievers who went to girls schools scored on average 17. Among the lowest 10% achievers in mixed schools that score was -10. It means girls who start secondary struggling with their work are more likely to get GCSEs and stay on at school to do A-levels. Janette Wallis, editor of the Good Schools Guide, said: A lot of parents will look at the benefits of co-ed schools, like the fact that girls and boys are educated side-by-side preparing them for the world of work and life. But to disregard this evidence would be a mistake. We never expected to see such a difference. She said the effect could be down to girls working better without boys distracting them but acknowledged the fact that educationally aspirant parents could seek out girls-only schools, which could also make a difference. Alice Sullivan, a researcher at the Institute of Education, University of London, and a specialist in single-sex schooling, said: It is very interesting that girls seem to be making more progress at single-sex schools. It does support a body of research evidenc e that girls do better in single-sex environments. However, other leading academics said the research was more conflicting. Alan Smithers, director of education at Buckingham University, said: We know across the piece that the main variables relating to exam success are pupil characteristics, social background and quality of teacher. There is very little space for gender in the classroom to make a difference. Where it apparently has an effect it relates to other factors, such as the aspirations of the parents who want their daughter educated in a single-sex school. But if this is true it will change our understanding. Sue Dunford, headteacher of Southfield School for Girls in Kettering, said: Its a question of confidence in the way girls develop. Its cool to be very good at anything in a girls school maths, sciences or physics. No one will ask why youre doing a boys subject. Girls who lack confidence can thrive more in girls-only schools. We dont have boys competing and distracting, so girls can really go for it.

Colleges Should Educate Student Athletes Essay -- Educating College At

All college students sitting in classrooms today face challenges that can impede their success. A challenging course schedule, competing demand for the student’s time, and college readiness are all factors that can hinder a student’s performance in the classroom. Moreover, these challenges also have the ability to impact the student’s overall student development. While most students share a common set of stressors, there are certain groups on campus that face pressures and challenges that are not shared by the majority of their peers. Student athletes are such a group. Joshua Watson (2005) noted the positive benefits of participating in intercollegiate activities, but also noted that such participation can lead to issues of â€Å"maladjustment, emotional illness, and psychological distress† (p. 442). Because of the unique issues facing student athletes, academic administrators and student affairs professionals are challenged to adequately address these challenges. While there may be existing services on campus to assist all students with success related issues, institutions must also take a closer look at the services that will be the most effective for student athletes. An important element is not only having a conducive learning environment for services, but also staff personnel who understand the complex life of a student athlete. Many athletic advising and counseling programs concentrate on academic eligibility; however, student athletes can also benefit from services that promote the overall development of the student (Howard-Hamilton & Sina, 2001). Based on the aforementioned, institutions could greatly benefit from a dedicated office that works directly and closely with student athletes. An Athletic Student Developme... ...ross models of psychological nigrescence. Journal of Black Psychology, 5(1), 13-31. Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Howard-Hamilton, M.F. & Sina, J.A. (2001). How college affects student athletes. New Directions for Student Services, 93, 35-46. Menke, D. (2013). Student-athletes in transition: Applying the Schlossberg model. Academic Advising Today, 36(3). Schlossberg, N.K., Waters, E.B., Goodman, J. (1995). Adults in transition: Linking practice with theory (2nd ed). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company. Watson, J. (2005). College student athlete’s attitudes toward help-seeking behavior and expectations of counseling services. Journal of College Student Development, 46(4), 442-449.

How College Students Use Wikipedia for Course-Related Essay

Why then are academics so wary about the use of Wikipedia within universities? There are a number of related reasons. Before outlining them we should acknowledge that there may be differences according to academic discipline in attitudes towards Wikipedia. Speaking to academics from the natural and medical sciences over the last year, it seems that those subjects are less concerned with issues of originality of source than the arts and social sciences. It also may be [pic] and this is genuine speculation [pic] that academics in the English speaking world, where most of the academic controversy over Wikipedia use has been, are more sensitive to the source than in other parts of the world. These qualifications aside, there are definite reasons why Wikipedia use is, at the very least, contentious in universities. First, it is the product of anonymous individuals rather than known authorities, Wales is quite explicit on this: One of the fastest things we’re beginning to lose is the view of the world that there are a handful of thoughtful, intelligent people that should be broadcasting their views to everyone. And then the public is some sort of crazed rabble, easily swayed by rhetoric and so forth. Now we have to have a more nuanced understanding. Wikipedia is not necessarily anti-academic but it is anti-elitist as evidenced by the short shrift given to eminent academics in debates when they expected deference (see Keen 2007, 43[pic]4). Second, the non-proprietary nature of Wikipedia cuts against academic culture which valorises the rights of the author and publisher. Third, the anonymity of Wikipedia articles is alien to the cache of the named writer of the journal article or book. Fourth, the collaborative process challenges the norm of individual creation, prevalent in the arts and social sciences. Fifth, as intimated, Wikipedia departs from the standard mode of vetting by peer review. It is not true that articles are not reviewed. On the contrary, they are scrutinised by far more editors than for any journal. However, as the contributor is generally not an academic expert, so the reviewer is not generally an academic expert. So Wikipedia rejects academic custom in the compilation of knowledge. In addition, there are a number of what might be termed ‘learning and teaching’ issues pertaining to its use within universities. First, there is the issue of the accuracy of Teaching in Higher Education 651 Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 05:27 12 December 2012 Wikipedia entries, something that relates to the lack of formal expertise and peer review. Reviews of the accuracy of Wikipedia entries by formal expert(s) have actually been generally positive (for natural sciences see Giles 2005; American history Meier 2008). Despite this, the suspicion still surrounds Wikipedia that it cannot be trusted. O’Sullivan’s (2009, 119) assertion that ‘most people probably have an ambivalent attitude toward Wikipedia, thankful for its existence, using it frequently, but with reservations about its total reliability’ seems valid. Some academics would no doubt sympathise with the sardonic observation of comedian Frankie Boyle that Wikipedia entries should begin with ‘I reckon’. Second, some have questioned whether Wikipedia’s determination for studied neutrality is convincing. O’Sullivan (2010) complains that as Wikipedia only displays one voice, diversity is not incorporated and therefore articles become bland. Wales’s response is unapologetic: ‘Guilty as charged, we’re an encyclopedia’ (in Read 2006). Not that his approach to knowledge is without theory, it derives rather from his admiration for the convoluted ‘objectivist philosophy’ of Aryan Rand, the Russian e?migre? philosopher and novelist (Younkins 2007). A third learning and teaching concern is that, regardless of the reliability of Wikipedia, it is in itself an illegitimate form of research. Here the thinking would be that a student who culls Wikipedia for assignments does not understand scholarship. This consists of the consideration of various sources: a judicious sifting and ordering of knowledge, rather than lifting bite sized chunks of text that purport to capture a subject. On this Wales concurs, telling students: ‘For God sake, you’re in college; don’t cite the encyclopedia’ (in Young 2006). Some universities in the US have banned Wikipedia use, whilst others recommend a more discriminating approach (Jaschik 2007; Murley 2008). The latter is what Wales and others within Wikipedia advise: it should be used only as a starting place in academic research, a references source and a revision aid. What, however, is the evidence on Wikipedia use by students and academics at universities?

Gender, Gender And Mating ( Levay 2011 ) - 1676 Words

â€Å"Little boxes... little boxes... little boxes made of ticky-tacky.† There happens to be a blue one, a green one and a yellow one on the hillside, and they all look just the same. One can imagine that the good ol’ traditional family living in one of these boxes, in Malvina Reynold’s anthem of dismay for suburbia, consists of a cisgender husband and wife, 2.01 children, and a bestial companion (perhaps a cat, a dog, a mistress, a cabana boy, you name it). If natural selection is in this family’s favor, the 2.01 children would be able to find mates of their own and successfully produce children who can continue the familial lineage. However dominant the heterosexual may be in various cultural ethos, historical cultural contexts enforce†¦show more content†¦Based on the life stories he heard, Freud assumed that homosexual men reversed their internal gender role to satisfy the unrequited attraction to their mothers (LeVay 2011: 29). Freud’ s experiences with his clients does not count as evidence for the theory (LeVay 2011: 33). The conflict with the so-called oedipal complex is not a sufficient ground for sexual orientation, since there are many homosexuals who are comfortable identifying with conventional gender types as well as have good parental relationships. One can safely say that parental relationship is not the cause of sexual orientation, but another aspect of life may be. Behaviorist theory supposed that homosexuality is a learned trait from enjoying an initial same-sex experience and re-enforcement from repeated self-pleasuring to that experience (Cameron Cameron; McGuire et al. cited in LeVay 2011: 34). In a sense, homosexuality was deemed as a product filled into an initially virgin child through operant conditioning, as same-sex urges are means for gratification rather than castigation. However, cultural evidence shows that first sexual experiences do not determine a person’s subsequent sexual orientation. Victims of child sexual abuse do not establish their sexual orientation from their first experiences,