Should Secondary Physical Education Be Coeducational or Single-Sex?

Hannon, James C., Williams, Skip M., JOPERD--The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance

Physical education in public and private schools in the United States remained primarily separated by sex until the passage of Title IX in 1972. Under provisions of Title IX, schools were required to provide both boys and girls with the same opportunities to participate in all physical education activities. The only times considered appropriate for boys and girls to be separated was for class competition during contact sports such as wrestling, football, and hockey. As school districts started coming into compliance with Title IX, the inevitable question began to be asked, "Is coeducational or single-sex physical education the best learning environment for all students?"

Although one purpose of Title IX legislation was to eliminate gender inequity in physical education, research has indicated that inequitable teaching behaviors have continued and that these behaviors have limited the learning potential of both boys and girls (Dunbar & O'Sullivan, 1986; Griffin, 1984;Treanor, Graber, Housner, & Wiegand, 1998). This has led some to call for occasional, single-sex groupings within coeducational physical education (Gabbei, 2004), or a return to single-sex physical education (Scraton, 1993). Recently, the U.S. Department of Education (2006) made changes to alleviate restrictions on single-sex classes. These changes have provided greater flexibility for schools to be able to offer single-sex classes. The changes also require single-sex classes to be evaluated every two years to make sure that males and females are being treated equitably.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

We have found that nearly half of the middle or junior high schools in which we have placed student teachers have taken advantage of the Department of Education's alleviated restrictions to switch back to single-sex physical education classes. In our view, this action is as premature as the sudden switch to coeducational classes was in the 1970s. Educational reform should be based on a heavy dose of supporting research. After reform has been made, it should be carefully assessed to determine whether or not it is meeting its intended purpose. The move to coeducational classes in physical education was not supported by an appropriate amount of research, and the current trend towards switching back to single-sex physical education also lacks support.

If we solely examine the limited available research, it is difficult to …

Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Should Secondary Physical Education Be Coeducational or Single-Sex?. Contributors: Hannon, James C. - Author, Williams, Skip M. - Author. Journal title: JOPERD--The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. Volume: 79. Issue: 2 Publication date: February 2008. Page number: 6+. © 2009 American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD). COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale Group.

This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.