Why a girls’ school?

Source: justDIYteam, pixabay

Schools in Australia offer parents plenty of choice, and when choosing a school for their child there are many questions parents might ask about a school. Is the school culture one based in shared values? Are the teaching, academic opportunities and learning outcomes of high quality? Do pastoral structures and programs cater for the wellbeing of students? Is the school community one with which the family feels aligned and that promotes belonging? Are the sizes of the school and classes conducive to the level of care the child needs? Is the school committed to valuing and catering for each child?

With the Australian news currently publishing stories about some schools changing from single sex to co-education (mostly boys’ schools becoming co-ed), a question that is yet again in the limelight is: which is better, single sex education or co-education? I reflect below on the reasons that single sex education for girls and young women plays a vital role in serving the wellbeing and educational needs of our girls.

Schools are segments of society and the wider community, and, as pointed out by advocates of co-education, a mixed-gender environment does replicate our world. However, that means it can also replicate the inequities of the world into which our girls enter, post-school.

The 2023 United Nations’ Gender Snapshot points out some worrying figure for girls and women, including the following.

  • At the current rate of progress, the next generation of women will spend on average 2.3 more hours per day on unpaid care and domestic work than men.
  • Globally women hold 26.7% seats in parliament, 35.5% in local government and 28.2% of management positions in the workplace.
  • Women are twice as likely as men to report instances of discrimination based on sex and almost twice as likely as men to experience discrimination on the basis of marital status.

The 2023 Global Gender Gap Index places Australia as:

  • 29th for Political Empowerment;
  • 38th for Economic Participation and Opportunity;
  • 78th for Educational Attainment; and
  • 89th for Health and Survival.

Australia is ranked 71st in the world for women’s income as compared with men’s, and 53rd for wage equality for similar work. In Australia, the gender pay gap is 15%, and 34% of board positions are made up of women. The OurWatch website cites terrifying statistics about violence against women in Australia, including that 39% of women have experienced violence since the age of 15.

These sobering figures demonstrate that the gender gap in power, leadership, earnings, domestic labour, and violence remains entrenched. Bridge (2022) writes:

“We will not find gender justice by replicating the injustices and inequalities of society in our schools, and until we can reach equality our girls simply become collateral damage.”

There is a range of research demonstrating the benefits for girls of single sex education. A South Australian study by the Commissioner for Children and Young People (Connolly, 2022) found that girls reported that teachers use female students to moderate and monitor the behaviour of boys, including being asked to sit between boys to disrupt interactions between them, as well as taking boys to the principal’s office when they have ‘done something wrong’. The report found that school policies can promote the message to girls that boys can’t manage their own behaviour and that girls are responsible for the behaviour of their male peers. It additionally found that girls and young women in co-ed schools feel anxiety about playing sports at school. Sadker and Zittleman (2009) assert that in co-educational classes, boys have been found to get more of a teacher’s attention; and that boys are more likely to volunteer and to call out, while girls who know the answer are more likely to wait to be called on. When girls feel safe, Sadker and Zittleman say, girls are more likely to speak up in class and less likely to minimise themselves or ‘play dumb’. Bleidorn et al.’s (2015) study across 48 countries found significant gender gaps in self-esteem, with males consistently reporting higher self-esteem than females. Franklin and Rangel (2022) found that girls attending all-girls schools outperformed their peers at coeducational schools in mathematics and science.

As the principal of a girls’ school, I see first-hand every day the benefits of single-sex education for girls and young women. Earlier this year, I wrote about my observations, including that girls at my school tell me they can ‘come as they are’. Students say they feel they can be themselves, express themselves, and be accepted for themselves. Single sex education can disrupt gender norms, providing safe spaces for girls to grow and develop, and encouraging girls to take up space, to make space and to see spaces for themselves in those arenas not traditionally dominated by girls and women. Girls in single-sex education contexts are more likely to view the STEM domain as a female one, and to speak more positively about their STEM learning experiences (Robinson et al., 2021). Thompson’s (2003) research found that girls’ school environments led to girls selecting post-school pathways beyond those traditionally seen as ‘female’. She notes that:

“There appears to be something about the all-female high school environment that socialises women to more feminist gender role attitudes. Girls may be socialised differently in an all-female environment where girls are the top students and leaders, and where school  personnel  are  proactive in resisting  the traditional gender system. Perhaps the absence of boys encourages girls to focus more on careerist goals and less on romance and popularity.” (p.272)

Girls’ schools are designed intentionally for girls and young women. Gendered assumptions and pressures are deliberately disrupted, and female leadership, voice, ambition, and achievement are normalised. Leadership development is strongly tied to increasing self-confidence (Fitzgerald & Schutte, 2010). The Australian ‘Hands Up for Gender Equality’ study (Fitzsimmons et al., 2018) found that those activities that most develop confidence and efficacy in young people and 1) travel, 2) team sport, 3) leadership experience, and 4) leadership education. Girls in girls’ schools are the leaders, leadership is purposefully developed, wellbeing and curricular programs are tailored to girls, and participation in all arenas—including sports and STEM—is encouraged.

All schools are responsible for creating environments where young people feel safe from discrimination and violence, are accepted as and comfortable to be themselves, can focus on their education, and are supported to achieve their best. Each child is an individual with their own gifts and needs, and girls’ schools provide a safe, intentionally-designed environment in which our girls can and do flourish.

References

Bleidorn, W., Arslan, R. C., Denissen, J. J. A., Rentfrow, P. J., Gebauer, J. E., Potter, J., & Gosling, S. D. (2016). Age and gender differences in self-esteem—A cross-cultural window. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(3), 396–410.

Bridge, L. (2022). Girls should not be collateral damage in the push for co-ed schooling. EducationHQ online.https://educationhq.com/news/girls-should-not-be-collateral-damage-in-the-push-for-co-ed-schooling-125714/

Connolly, H. Commissioner for Children and Young People, South Australia (2022). Stereotypes and Sexism: the views  and experiences of SA school students.

Fitzsimmons, T. W., Yates, M. S., & Callan, V. (2018). Hands Up for Gender Equality: A Major Study into Confidence and Career Intentions of Adolescent Girls and Boys. The University of Queensland.

Franklin, D & Rangel, VS 2022, ‘Estimating the Effect of Single-Sex Education on Girls’ Mathematics and Science Achievement’, Leadership and Policy in Schools, vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print, pp. 1–18.

Robinson, D. B., Mitton, J., Hadley, G., & Kettley, M. 2021. ‘Single-sex education in the 21st century: A 20-year scoping review of the literature’, Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 106, pp. 103462-.

Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. R. (2009). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it. Simon and Schuster.

Thompson, J. S. (2003). The effect of single-sex secondary schooling on women’s choice of college major. Sociological Perspectives46(2), 257-278.

UN Women and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2023). Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2023.

World Economic Forum. (2023). Gender Gap Index Report.

How to #BalanceforBetter this International Women’s Day?

IWD2019

I realise that this year’s International Women’s Day theme #BalanceforBetter is focused on advocating for more gender balance for a better world. It’s about more women as leaders, on boards, and in STEM. It’s about closing the gender pay gap and accelerating gender equity.

But I keep seeing the #BalanceforBetter hashtag and thinking about my personal battles with ‘balance’ as a woman. I have over the last 12-18 months been working on the notion of balance in my life. Redressing the balance towards self-care, wellbeing, health and mental space, factors that have been crowded out by busyness, work, commitment to family, wanting to make a difference. I have written about trying to say ‘no’ to more things and to prioritise what matters.

I’ve been writing a book as part of my push to be ‘10% braver’ as the #WomenEd squad would say. Two other projects are examples of my advocacy for women; as co-editor of the recently-published book Flip the System Australia: What matters in education, we ensured that more than half of the chapters were contributed to by women authors, and I have co-edited a special issue of the Journal of Educational Administration and History in which we offer female-authored papers on re-imagining school leadership. I’ve been lifting heavy weights to feel physically stronger and floating in floatation tanks to feel mentally lighter. I know this is a first-world take on the notion of ‘balance’. I’m in a privileged enough position that I can consider my writing, wellbeing, family and leisure time. I have choices available to me, which is not the case for all women.

This week I saw the following sculpture at Perth’s Cottesloe beach as part of the Sculpture by the Sea exhibition.

1E6A3477

It is by Hamish McMillan and is called ‘Internment’. The wire figure interned within the cage slumps over his desk, met by the words, ‘Nice work, Jeff!’ on his computer screen. He is surrounded by boxes with messages of those things perpetuating his imprisonment in a toxic work culture: “obligation to colleagues”, “I make a difference”, “credit card due”, “mortgage due”, “failure is not an option”. How many of us are chained to our devices or caged within our work worlds because of obligation, inspiration, ambition, bills to pay, or the desire to make a difference? At what cost? Is it being a ‘bad feminist’ if a woman does not aspire to a powerful, well-paid management position? Or is it just making good choices that suit us, even if it does nothing to balance gender roles at the highest levels of the workforce? Three female politicians have recently left the Australian Liberal Party. Sticking it out in an unsatisfying, harmful or misogynistic work environment may not be worth the power, pay and prestige it provides.

In my field of education, the longitudinal Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey of principals and deputy principals has found that in these top school roles, a disproportionate number of women are consistently paid less than their male colleagues. It also found that physical violence towards principals and deputy principals is now 37% or 1 in 3 principals (9.3 times the rate of the general population). Women are most at risk with 40% experiencing violence compared to 32% of men. So women principals and deputy principals in Australia are more likely to be paid less and also more likely to experience physical violence in their work than their male counterparts. This survey also reveals worrying trends in work hours, mental wellbeing and physical health for principals and deputy principals, something that dissuades potential candidates, particularly women, from aspiring to and applying for these roles.

Those who lead organisations or who stand on the stage normalise ideas about who can lead, who should speak and to whom we should apparently listen. Often in leadership roles, keynote presentations and film, advertising or media representations of leadership, women are under-represented. So what can we do to #BalanceforBetter?

Organisations can consider how to advance women in their ranks, including into top jobs, governance positions and roles traditionally held by men. Conference organisers, event planners and awards panels can continue to work on broadening the diversity of those who present, sit on panels (no manels, please!) and receive awards. The media can stop asking women how they cope with juggling work with family, while not asking the same of men. Colleagues can refuse to tolerate off-hand remarks that are sexist or demeaning to women, even when masked as ‘jokes’. Men can question those things they take for granted or see as normal, that perhaps work in their favour, but do not benefit the women around them. Researchers can consider the diversity of their citation practices. Women can consider how to equalise and advocate for gender balance in their organisations, and also how to find a sense of balance and wellbeing in our own lives. We can all take positive, even micro, actions towards more balance.