3 ms·
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/18/secondary-schools-girls-gcse-results https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/18/secondary-... > Girls
by anonymouskimmer 4y ago
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/18/secondary-schools-girls-gcse-results https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/18/secondary-...
> 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.
- throwaway290 4y agoThat is not for religious reasons. And if talking about UK then there are even more instances in which the church embraced cultural evolution.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoReligion was not the sole reason girls were originally excluded from education. And like race, religion was also not the only original reason that when group schooling was made available to girls and women it was in segregated schools. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sex_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sex_education And not all Catholic schools segregate by sex.
- throwaway290 4y agoThe discussion is about religion and how it is silly to say that church can ignore culture around. Segregated higher ed is a random example I thought where catholicism got on with the times (I thought it was a church thing). Another example is contraceptive use. I didn't mention discrimination against women at all, I don't know enough about catholicism to say if it was a thing.