Hierarchical Deficiencies: Constructed Differences Between Adolescent Boys and Girls in a Public School Single-Sex Program in the United States

Journal of Adolescent Research

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 377-400

  Glasser, Howard M ^a  

^a BRYN MAWR COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

gender; middle school; public schooling; queer theory; single sex education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859856760     PISSN: 07435584     EISSN: 15526895     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0743558411409933     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. How schools shortchange girls. Washington, DC: Author; 1992:.
2. Arms E.Handbook for achieving gender equity through education. Klein S. S.Richardson B.Grayson D. A.Fox L. H.Kramarae C.Pollard D. S.Dwyer C. A., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2007:171-190.
3. Bornstein K.Gender outlaw: On men, women and the rest of us. New York, NY: Routledge; 1994:.
4. Bracey G. W.Separate but superior? A review of issues and data bearing on single-sex education. Phoenix: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University; 2006:.
5. Cohen D. S.No boy left behind? Single-sex education and the essentialist myth of masculinity.Indiana Law Journal. 2009;84 (135): 135-188.
6. Dee T. S.The why chromosome.Education Next. 2006;4:68-75.
7. Dilley P.Queer theory: Under construction.Qualitative Studies in Education. 1999;12:457-472.
8. Donnellan M. B.,Trzesniewski K. H.,Robins R. W.Handbook of personality development. Mroczek D. K.Little T. D., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006:285-310.
9. Erickson F.Handbook of research on teaching. Wittrock M. C., ed. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1986:119-161.
10. Erikson E. H.Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton; 1968:.
11. Fausto-Sterling A.The five sexes, revisited.Sciences. 2000;40 (4): 18-23.
12. GlasserH. M. (2008). Single-sex middle school science classrooms: Separate and equal?: (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertation Abstracts Online. (AAI3348110).
13. Glasser H. M.Arguing separate but equal: A study of argumentation in public single-sex science classes in the United States.International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology. 2011;3 (1): 70-92.
14. Glasser H. M.,Smith J. P.On the vague meaning of "gender" in education research: The problem, its sources, and recommendations for practice.Educational Researcher. 2008;37 (6): 343-350.
15. Gunckel K. L.Queering science for all: Probing queer theory in science education.Journal of Curriculum Theorizing. 2009;25 (2): 62-75.
16. Harter S.At the threshold: The developing adolescent. Feldman S. S.Elliott G. R., ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1990:352-387.
17. Harter S.Self and identity: Fundamental issues. Ashmore R. D.Jussim L., ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1997:81-105.
18. Harter S.The construction of the self. New York, NY: Guilford; 1999:.
19. Harter S.Handbook of self and identity. Leary M. R.Tangney J. P., ed. New York, NY: Guilford; 2003:610-642.
20. Hyde J. S.The gender similarities hypothesis.American Psychologist. 2005;60:581-592.
21. Jackson J."Dangerous presumptions": How single-sex schooling reifies false notions of sex, gender, and sexuality.Gender and Education. 2010;22:227-238.
22. Kessler S. J.Theorizing feminism: Parallel trends in the humanities and social sciences. Herrmann A. C.Stewart A. J., ed. Boulder, CO: Westview; 2001:135-157.
23. Lev A. I.Transgender emergence: Therapeutic guidelines for working with gender-variant people and their families. New York, NY: Haworth Clinical Practice Press; 2004:79-109.
24. Mael F. A.Single-sex and coeducational schooling: Relationships to socioemotional and academic development.Review of Educational Research. 1998;68 (2): 101-129.
25. Mandel L.,Shakeshaft C.Masculinities at school. Lesko N., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2000:75-103.
26. MeadS. (2008, March3). The problem with gender-based education [Web log post]. New America Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.newamerica.net/blog/early-ed-watch/2008/problem-gender-based-education-2517.
27. Miller P. H.Theories of developmental psychology. 1993). Piaget's cognitive-stage theory. In Theories of developmental psychology (3rd ed., pp. 29-106). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.New York, NY: W. H. Freeman; 1993:29-106.
28. National Association for Single Sex Public Education. (2010). NASSPE: Schools & Classrooms. Retrieved from http://www.singlesexschools.org/schools-schools.htm.
29. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425 (2002).
30. Riordan C.Girls and boys in school: Together or separate?. New York, NY: Teachers College Press; 1990:.
31. Riordan C.Gender in policy and practice: Perspectives on single-sex and coeducational schooling. Datnow A.Hubbard L., ed. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer; 2002:10-30.
32. Rosenberg S.Self and identity: Fundamental issues. Ashmore R. D.Jussim L., ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1997:23-45.
33. Sadker D.,Sadker M.,Zittleman K. R.Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it. 2009). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it (Rev. and updated ed.). New York, NY: Scribner.New York, NY: Scribner; 2009:.
34. Salomone R. C.Single-sex programs: Resolving the research conundrum.Teachers College Record. 2006;108:778-802.
35. Snyder V. L.,Broadway F. S.Queering high school biology textbooks.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2004;41:617-636.
36. Sommers C. H.The war against boys: How misguided feminism is harming our young men. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster; 2000:.
37. Tyack D.,Hansot E.Learning together: A history of coeducation in American schools. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1990:.
38. Tyre P.The trouble with boys.Newsweek. 2006;:44-52.
39. Tyre P.The trouble with boys: A surprising report card on our sons, their problems at school, and what parents and educators must do. New York, NY: Crown; 2008:.
40. Single-sex versus coeducational schooling: A systematic review. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service; 2005:.
41. CFR 34 Part 106: Nondiscrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.Federal Register. 2006a;71:62530-62543.
42. U.S. Department of Education. (2006b). Secretary Spellings announces more choices in single sex education amended regulations give communities. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2006/10/10242006.html.
43. Wiegert E.,Che S. M.Single-sex classrooms in a southern charter middle school: Student, teacher, and parent perspectives.Current Issues in Middle Level Education. 2010;15 (1): 1-9.
44. Wilchins R. A.Read my lips: Sexual subversion and the end of gender. Ithaca, NY: Firebrand; 1997:.
45. Wilchins R.GenderQueer: Voices from beyond the sexual binary. Nestle J.Howell C.Wilchins R., ed. Los Angeles, CA: Alyson; 2002:33-46.
46. Wilchins R.Queer theory, gender theory: An instant primer. Los Angeles, CA: Alyson; 2004:.
47. Younger M.,Warrington M.Single-sex teaching in a co-educational comprehensive school in England: An evaluation based upon students' performance and classroom interactions.British Educational Research Journal. 2007;28:353-374.
48. Zittleman K. R.Gender perceptions of middle schoolers: The good and the bad.Middle Grades Research Journal. 2007;2 (2): 65-97.