March 13

EAP Prompt Due Friday for Periods 1 and 5, Saturday for Period 2

Respond to the following released EAP prompt. You will take a similar writing test this week.

“Some leaders in Washington D.C. want to change the educational policy meant to ensure ‘gender equity’ in education and encourage the expansion of single-sex education, either in separate schools or in classes. This is sure to bring howls of protest from groups dedicated to integrating the sexes, whether or not integrating them makes sense or, in fact, is even fair. But many educators contend that boys and girls both do better when taught separately. Teachers can focus on academics and let kids develop social skills outside of the classroom. Consider that private schools, which are often single-sex institutions, send a higher percentage of their students to college than do public schools. Therefore, making single-sex classrooms an option will go a long way toward improving education and perhaps close the gap that is growing as more women than men go to college.”
-S. Affo
Explain Affo’s argument and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with her analysis and conclusion. Support your position, providing reasons and examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Posted March 13, 2013 by tashak38 in category Uncategorized

About the Author

I live in the San Francisco Bay Area--Big Up to the East Bay

87 thoughts on “EAP Prompt Due Friday for Periods 1 and 5, Saturday for Period 2

  1. Jashleen Singh

    Jashleen Singh
    Period 2

    In this passage, S. Affro argues that boys and girls have more potential of going to college and earning more out of their education, if they are instructed separately. She uses statistics based upon the rates of which private school students versus public school students attend college. She proves that single-sex private schools do send more students to college. I can strongly agree with Affro, that having a separate education for boys and girls in beneficial to both genders. I can agree with Affro because of the experiences I’ve seen throughout my years of punlic education.

    While boys and girls are growing up, they feel the need to find their significant other. They no longer pay attention to their studies and let their worlds revolve around each other. More and more young women become pregnant at the age of only 16, because their priorities aren’t straight. So many drop out of school, and others struggle with their grades. The distraction of the opposite sex should not be worth giving up education.

    Also, multiple times throughout my education, I’ve noticed that so many boys and girls get suspended, expelled, and punished for getting into fights. There is no doubt that these fights are based on either a girl or boy. While growing up, especially in high school, many students forget that they are attending school for knowledge, and not to impress another gender, nor fight for them.

    Also, many students who cannot afford private school, who would rather not deal with the opposite sex, are forced to. Not having single-sex education is not fair to those who are intelligent enough to realize they are going to have distractions thrown at them but don’t have a choice.

    All in all, it is clear that there will always be an attraction between male and female, but that attraction should not stand in the way of an education. Grades and schools will better their education if they were to teach only one sex.

    Reply
    1. tashak38 (Post author)

      Use more references to the text to support your argument. Go back to what Affo says and use that to further your position. Don’t forget your concession. I feel like you had more to say here, Jashleen.

      Reply
  2. dartise jones

    Dartise Jones
    march 17 2013
    AP english

    In this passage S.Affro’s argues that boys and girls learn more when separated from each other. By them getting separated it will close the margin between girls and boys going to college. He used private schools that are single sex institutions ,and how the students learn more. I disagree with Affro argument that separation of sexes will close the margin between boys and girls going to college. I think the reason why the private institution send more boys to college is because of funding not them being separated from girls. The other reason why they have more boys going to college is most of the student come from a wealthier family which allows them to get tutoring, and other resources that helps them do good in school.
    Private school send more kids to college due to resources and they have plenty of funds which allows them to help kids.Affro says that boys who get separated from do better i strongly disagree. I think the reason why the boys do better is because it’s a private school. since private schools are smaller the teacher can pay more attention to all of their students allowing the boys to learn more. Even in private schools when boys and girls go to school together thier rate of going to college is about the same.Basically showing that boys and girls being together want affect their chances of college.
    The other reason is the boys that attend these private school usually come from a wealthier households which gives them tons of resources. When you come from a family with money the parents put the boys in tutoring as soon as they see them doing bad in school.They just dont get any kind of tutor they get the top of line tutor because the parents can afford it.Meaning that the struggling boys get instant help which helps them get ahead.So wealthier household helps them get to college not being separated from girls.
    So this is why separated boys and girls want make a difference unless the student attends a private school,or come from wealthy households.This means Affro argument is using the wrong variable to eplain why more girls go to college than boys.Money, and resources do make a big difference on kids getting.

    Reply
    1. tashak38 (Post author)

      Dartise,

      You are going to have to be sure to always proofread before submitting. Your argument is solid. I just need you to be sure that you are always writing according to your list of writing expectations.

      Reply
  3. Phuong-My N.

    Phuong-My N.
    Keeble
    AP English, Per. 2
    16 March 2013

    In S. Affo’s argument, she asserts that single-sex classrooms is more beneficial for both genders than mixed classrooms. Studies have shown that private schools “…often single-sex institutions…send a higher percentage of their students to college than do public schools.” Affo also claims that with choice of single-sexed classrooms, the number of male and females will be equal in college. I agree with Affo’s assertions based on personal experiences.

    I have attended public school my whole life and noticed a significant difference between genders when it comes to education. I have observed that laziness and distractions occur early on in the years students attend school. For example, in kindergarten, the boys would fight and bother the girls that were attempting to do their work. The boys were usually the ones who got in trouble and sent to time-out. That occurred constantly and continuously all the way until the end of high school. Another example is the SAT class I am currently attended. There are twenty females and no males at all. The classroom is extremely quiet and efficient without the distractions of males.

    Single-sex classrooms are necessary in order to succeed. As Affo stated, more students from private schools are attending college than students from public school. Right now, there are more females attending college than males. Often, students just attend school to socialize and meet their “soulmate”. Most fights in high school occur because of the opposite sex. They are not focused and are distracted by minor situations. Thus, in order for students to succeed, they must be in single-sex classrooms.

    Others might oppose single-sex classrooms and claim that it is unfair to compare public schools to private schools due to finances. Those people do not take scholarships, grants, loans, or financial aid into consideration. Public school students have the same opportunity as private school students, they just have to work for it. Also, people believe that single-sex classrooms will decrease student’s social skills. Students will only be segregated in the classrooms, not outside. Nonetheless, students will always have a chance to mingle elsewhere.

    Single-sex classrooms is best for students attending school. Students will not get distracted by opposite genders and will focus more on their studies. Public school students can definitely compete with private school students as long as they are motivated and determined. If you want a more equal percentage of genders attending college, single-sex classrooms is the way to start making a difference.

    Reply
    1. tashak38 (Post author)

      Excellent argument. I would like to see more references to Affo’s argument. You must cite the text and integrate it into your composition.

      Reply
  4. Heather H.

    Heather H.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11
    16 March 2013

    A solid education is the foundation for success. Many people have strong views on how the education system can be improved to increase the success of the common people. S. Affo claims “…single-sex classrooms will go a long way to improving education”. I disagree with this position completely. Affo’s logic is flawed and draws a conclusion that is nonsensical and quite dangerous.

    To support her position, S. Affo relies on the facts that those who go to private school are more likely to go to college and that private school are often single-sex institutions. However, correlation does not imply causation. Private schools are often held to higher standards than public schools. Course materials, teachers, and supplies are all of a higher quality in private schools. These factors no doubt lead to higher percentages of college attendees. It is merely a coincidence that some of the private schools happen to be single-sex.

    Limiting a school to a single sex is highly dangerous in regards to social development. Those who attend school with only those of the same gender do not get the same interaction as those at a typical, mixed sex school. It is important for one to interact with people of all races, economic background, sexes, and gender identities. Tolerance and acceptance cannot be formed without exposure to people who are different than oneself.

    While S. Affo believes that single-sex classrooms would be beneficial, she is highly mistaken. Separating the sexes cannot be proven as a reason for higher college attendee percentages. Also, it inhibits social growth. Segregation is never helpful.

    Reply
  5. Canyon Riley

    Canyon R.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11
    16 March 2013

    S. Affo’s argument suggests that education should be separated by gender because statistics confirm that single-sex institutions, such as private schools, have a higher percentage of their students attending college compared to the students of public schools. I solemnly disagree with her assertion only because she creates a fallacy with her conclusion to her analysis.
    I strongly disagree with Affo to the extend that she creates a fallacy by assuming that single-sex schools increase your chances to go to college and the students of a single-sex school have a higher ability to learn than those attending a public school. Gender should not be determining factor in someone’s education; a person’s willingness to learn should influence their performance in school. The reason that students perform better in private institutions because private schools fund themselves which is why they have more money to spend on themselves where as public schools are funded by a district that has to also fund other public schools in close proximity. Besides there is no solid evidence that gender segregated students will do better if taught separately. Even researchers at Science magazine state that,” sex-segregated education—is deeply misguided, and often justified by weak, cherry-picked, or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence. There is no well-designed research showing that single-sex (SS) education improves students’ academic performance, but there is evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism.” Furthermore, Affo does not reveal to her readers where she got her sources from specifically and to me that loses some of her credibility.
    In my opinion, a student’s education depends on self-motivation as well as the school’s teachers and staff eagerness to help that student. Some public schools have the same opportunities as private schools, but there are still many schools that are put at a disadvantage. If Affo really wants to,” close the gap that is growing as more women than men go to college”, then she would focus more on the arguments surrounding educational equality for all schools.

    Reply
  6. Merritt Walker

    Merritt Walker
    Ms.Keeble
    AP English 2
    15 March 2013

    In the passage, S. Affo argues whether or not students would learn better if they were segregated by gender. This is a controversial topic because people should not be segregated; people of all types should be able to focus and work together. I do not agree with the idea of seperating classrooms/schools by gender, because it does not prove that anyt group is smarter than the other.
    Affo states that there are many segregated private schools. “Consider that private schools, which are often single-sex institutions, send a higher percentage of their students to college than do public schools.” This statement is innacurate because private schools do not send more students to college because of gender, they have more resources. Private schools recieve money from parents paying tuition for their child; with the money schools are able to buy the best books, and materials for their students’ education.
    In a mixed school, or classroom the different genders are able to interact with each other. Students who are at schools with the same sex do not get the same interaction becasuse they are only with their gender. When the students go to college or if they start working they will have to be in a mixed environment, and students in a same-sex school might not be able to adjust so easily.
    In conclusion, some people may think that same-sex schools is a good idea, but i believe co-ed schools is a better option. Students are able to engage with each other, and it is socially and educationally better for them.

    Reply
  7. Caleb M.

    Caleb M.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English, Per. 2
    16 March 2013
    S. Affo argues that segregating classrooms by gender can improve the education system and close the gap between male and female students attending colleges. He uses the common statistic that private schools with same-sex class rooms send more students to college on average than public schools with all gender class rooms. I disagree with Affo’s claim due to two important aspects that he ignored in his thesis: financial funding and learning environments.
    Most private schools are able to afford learning materials that can be used to enhance a students learning, which most public schools are unable to do. According to NSBA.org, integrating computer programs, video discs, and multimedia software into schools is capable of increasing test scores and learning retention in students that attend private schools. Most public schools are incapable of purchasing such material because they do not posses the funding available, meaning they are at a much greater advantage. I’ve also noticed that public schools generally have a larger number of teachers than private schools. This makes it more difficult for there to be a high standard of teachers willing to aid students at a distinguished level, unlike private schools that can carefully choose their small faculty.
    Secondly, the environment at a school can determine the success of students regardless of their gender. For example, Hayward High School has a large majority of students who are not serious about higher education and treat academics with an indifferent attitude. If a student has a large majority of friends who are unconcerned about education, then it is sure to be expressed in them in some sort of way. Unlike private schools, who focus on nothing but academics. A friend of mine who attended Moreau Catholic High School briefed me on how serious his peers around him were about their education and how most of them rarely had non-academic obligations that interfered with their schooling. A setting such as this would most definitely enhance a private schools percentage of students attending colleges.
    Although Affo makes the good point that same-sex private schools send more students to universities than public schools, it has barely anything to do with gender. The main reason why there is a gap between private schools that are same-sex and public schools, is because of funding and learning environments. In conclusion, I disagree with Affo’s claim.

    Reply
      1. Caleb M.

        Caleb M.
        Ms. Keeble
        AP English, Per. 2
        16 March 2013
        S. Affo argues that segregating classrooms by gender can improve the education system and close the gap between male and female students attending colleges. She uses the common statistic that private schools with same-sex class rooms send more students to college on average than public schools with all gender class rooms. I disagree with Affo’s claim due to two important aspects that she ignored in her thesis: financial funding and learning environments.
        Most private schools are able to afford learning materials that can be used to enhance a students learning, which most public schools are unable to do. It has been proven that integrating computer programs, video discs, and multimedia software into schools is capable of increasing test scores and learning retention in students that attend private schools. Most public schools are incapable of purchasing such material because they do not posses the funding available, meaning they are at a much greater advantage. I’ve also noticed that public schools generally have a larger number of teachers than private schools. This makes it more difficult for there to be a high standard of teachers willing to aid students at a distinguished level, unlike private schools that can carefully choose their small faculty.
        Secondly, the environment at a school can determine the success of students regardless of their gender. For example, Hayward High School has a large majority of students who are not serious about higher education and treat academics with an indifferent attitude. If a student has a large majority of friends who are unconcerned about education, then it is sure to be expressed in them in some sort of way. Unlike private schools who focus on nothing but academics. A friend of mine who attended Moreau Catholic High School briefed me on how serious his peers around him were about their education and how most of them rarely had non-academic obligations that interfered with their schooling. A setting such as this would most definitely enhance a private schools percentage of students attending colleges.
        Although Affo makes the good point that same-sex private schools send more students to universities than public schools, it has barely anything to do with gender. The main reason why there is a gap between private schools that are same-sex and public schools, is because of funding and learning environments. In conclusion, I disagree with Affo’s claim.

        Reply
  8. Aaron C

    Aaron Chon
    Ms Keeble
    APENG 11 P2
    16 March 2013

    Education is the gate to the future for many, and the youth of today are often reminded by their guardians of this. In order to get the best future, an individual must therefore have a good job, which is based on the level and type of education that has been received. Because of this, it is the goal of many to get the best education possible; however, there are both supplements and factors of distraction that can affect the quality of education. S Affo argues that because private schools are usually all-girls or all-boys as opposed to co-ed, they experience more students going to more and better colleges as opposed to the public system; therefore schools should not be integrated and follow the example of private schools. This kind of logic is fallacious and unnecessary, as it would be wasting energy on a target that is faintly, if at all, related to the core issues.

    Affo first states that schools should be co-ed because that is how private schools are, and private schools see more students end up successful. However, this is indirect deception, as the ultimate source of success within a private institution is due to the wealth from tuition. The tuition first acts as an incentive for students to do better, because the expensive amounts that they paid would go to waste otherwise. Another thing to note about tuition is that it brings in much more income to private schools than the typical budget allowed to a public school. With more financial resources available, private schools have better facilities, better learning materials that have not been circulated, and the ability to hire more costly teachers that know more of the subjects to be taught. Thus, it can be established that the success of private schools is not due to the separation of students by gender, but rather, the presence of tuition.

    Affo goes on to argue that students in schools that aren’t co-ed socialize outside of the classroom while teachers are allowed to teach. This statement is based on the assumption that co-ed is the cause of socializing in the classroom environment, as well as suggesting that all socializing impedes the learning process, both of which are completely over-generalized. The ultimate source of socializing does not arise from males and females being in the same environment, but rather, from the media and social drama that arises, whether a facility is co-ed or otherwise. Socializing is also necessary for students to communicate the knowledge that they are learning within the classroom, whether asking for help, or collaborating differing opinions. Socializing that takes outside of the classroom will more often be distracted and unrelated to educational focuses in comparison to socializing that takes place in the classroom, so Affo’s claim that socializing should take place outside of the classroom is a poor one.

    Like with all cases, there will be extremities in which the idea suggested by Affo will be more effective for a learning environment. However, on a large scale, Affo’s idea that education of students should be separated by gender is not effective, and in fact has more drawbacks in comparison to any potential benefits. Because Affo thought that the participation of students in co-ed schools was the source of students doing poorly in school, the conclusion became erratic as well. Separating schools by gender will not yield any comparable benefits, so that idea should be discarded for a better one.

    Reply
  9. Areli S

    Areli S
    Period 2
    Ms. Keeble
    MArch 16th, 2013

    S. Affo’s argument favors single sex schooling to be practiced amongst public schools. She reasons with her audience that same-sex schools are more efficient and give students the better chance to learn. She provides a rebuttal in her argument to show her understanding of both sides and receive credibility.

    Personally, I am against single sex schooling because I don’t believe that having the other gender in class will deprive you of leaning better, I think it all takes part in the personal drive for learning that the person has. I also think that by separating the two genders it causes trouble with socializing or working together in the future. When segregation is created, ugly things form, like sexism. Furthermore, people need to remember that based on Affo’s observation that private schools that have single sex classes have better education opportunities is not valid because more aspects of the environment play role into that. And in pure honesty, if students or their parents really wanted them to attend single sex classes/schools they would already be enlisted into them. Thus, I believe that public schools shouldn’t create this segregation in campuses.

    Reply
  10. Ross hatlen

    Ross Hatlen
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English Language & Composition
    16 March 2013

    S. Affo’s argument asserts that schools should be segregated by gender. He claims that kids learn better when they are with their own gender. I do not think that Affo’s argument is valid at all. His logic is flawed and he should include the perks of private against public schools.
    Affo uses an example of private schools, how could this be compared to the public school environment. It cannot, unsegregated private schools still have higher college acceptance rate then public schools. It is not the gender that helps out the kids, it is the fact that they have better teachers. Public schools cannot afford teachers that the private schools can. The single gender classes have no effect on the students.
    This man is a sexist “close the gap that is growing as more women than men go to college,” this man wants more men going to college than women. He is trying to revert society back to the 1900’s. His rant on single gender class rooms is just to shove his bigoted ideas down the throats of Americans. I can see how some people could believe that singe gender classes work better, but what will the kids do when they are out of school. They will not know how to talk to the other gender.
    Some points in Affo’s argument could be seen as valid but not certain. There is stipulation to everything such as the private school idea. It could not be seen valid because it does not apply to public schools. Just this fact make his argument invalid.

    Reply
  11. Kiloni D

    Kiloni Driskell
    16 March 2013
    AP English
    2

    S. Affo argues that single-sexed classrooms has a better advantage of sending more students to college. She argues students learn better when they are in the classroom with the same sex. I disagree with Affo’s assertion to an extent when she states that the oppisite sex is a distraction to their learning.

    I disagree with Affo’s statement to an extent because in a way I do believe the oppisite sex is a distraction but if oneself wants to learn they should have the ability to seperate themselves from that situation. Drama is a main factor that distracts students in general. Also having a same sex classroom can be arduous socially in the outside world. In order to be successful, oneself needs to have the ability to cooperate with the oppisite sex.

    Private schools may be more invloved with their students but the biggest thing that they are lacking is diversity. It is hard for a student to learn in a different enviroment especially when their is not alot of people you can relate too. A student should not have to feel like they are an outcast and that can be a major distraction from their ability to learn. Private schools just have more money to suppport their students which means better material.

    Both private and public schools have advantages and disadvantages, either way your getting a good education. They both provide something better than the other but in my opinion I believe it is better to be in a classroom with the oppisite sex especially when oneself has to transition from single-sex to oppisite sex in college.

    Reply
  12. Haley R.

    Haley R.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English per. 2
    15 March 2013

    S. Affo’s argument proposes that children should be educated separately, due to recent studies stating that students learn more efficiently when separated by sex; weather by classroom or school. Affo uses statistics from private schools to engage his readers through the comparison between private and public educating institutions.
    I do not agree with Affo’s argument to a certain extent. I believe that if students have the desire to learn they will do so; if not, you have the product of the low test scores and so on, that people bash public schools about. For example the statement: “Consider that private schools, which are often single-sex institutions, send a higher percentage of their students to college than do public schools. Therefore, making single-sex classrooms an option will go a long way toward improving education.” This passage is only based on the fact that the classrooms are separate, there are no other factors that play apart of the argument.
    The separation of genders in a classroom may be a supporting factor in students not working to their full potential because of distractions, but educators need to look at all of the reasoning behind the abstraction. I believe students should not be separated in schools by gender.

    Reply
  13. David .D

    David Delgado
    Ms. Keeble
    Period 2
    AP English
    14 March 2013
    S. Affo argues that it is best for both females and males to have single sex classrooms. In my opinion he is not completely correct. It is true that separating both sexes can have a positive outcome but it can also be negative. The reason why this is such a big issue is because it involves the students and educators future; something like this can affect the society heavily. This essay says that single sex classes will be better for everyone won’t it doesn’t say is the disadvantages.

    If there were separate sex schools both genders after they graduate from school, or whenever there not in school would have problems socializing with the opposite sex. This can affect the society heavily because if females and males have no experience with one another it will be hard after they graduate from college to work with them. Both sexes would only have experience working with their gender and therefore it would be really hard to work with the opposite gender. Males and females need to be able to work together in this society in order for it to grow.

    In conclusion single sex classes are a disadvantage for both male and females. Doing this will not prepare students for the actual world but it will give the opposite gender no experience with the other. Doing something like would only bring failure to work in a workplace.

    Reply
  14. DaJohn Wade

    S. Affro’s argument is on single-sex education. His perspective is that males and females will learn more efficiently when they are separated from each other in a classroom. I disagree with this claim because there will be social problems amongst the classrooms, which can jeopardize their future and sexism has a huge possibility of forming in the minds of these youths.

    In a single-sex classroom, the youth is only working with their gender. In the real world, that youth will have to find ways to work with both genders. A child can grow up to have social skill problems since their entire life of education was only with the same sex. Once they graduate from high school, a challenge of working with males/females will be a hurdle that they should have jumped over 4 years ago and beyond that. Communicating with them outside of school would not balance out the single-sex in classrooms either. Students spend more time in school than they do outside of it. Not only will this effect their future, but it can prompt sexist thoughts into their minds.

    Since there was no grade mentioned that this will happen in, children in pre-school can be subjected to single-sex education. In the beginning of their growth, mind still developing, forming ideas on the world, toddlers will be exploited to only their gender counterparts. If this continued throughout their life, those toddlers will grow into young adults will ideas that being of the opposite sex is bad. Society which is integrated does not need to have a rise of sexism. Dividing the youth into genders for education will only be a catalyst for this.

    Reply
  15. Bilguun Batdorj

    Bilguun Batdorj
    Ms Keeble
    AP English 2*
    March 15 2013

    S. Affo states that America will see a improvement in the education sector if single sex schools are recommended and funded. She backs up this belief by using the fact that private schools(same sex)on average send a larger portion of it’s students to college than public schools(multi-sex). By thinking about Affo’s statements, I can conclude that I am somewhat against the idea of same sex education because of the fact that it might cause a split in gender equality.

    It is apparent that isolating a large group of people from another will undoubtedly cause racism/sexism. Affo states that men and women should be taught in different, separate institutions in order to maximize the potential these groups can make. The same ideology was expressed in the late 1800’s with the Plessy v. Ferguson court case. This law was approved into practice in the South upon the belief that racial segregation would bring peace and that it would deter Blacks and Whites from confronting with each other. The outcome came out completely the opposite than it was first anticipated. As you know from history class, this new law brought upon a hundred years of struggle for the African American community and it jump started the ethnic “wars” between Blacks and Whites. In another case, a lot of radical Middle Eastern nations apply gender segregation in education. According to various UN and USA studies, these nations that have segregated gender schools perform worse than nations that do not have a single sex education system. The policy of single sex education in these radical nations also brought upon immense gender inequality (In Saudi Arabia, women have to eat at a separate restaurant).

    As a conclusion, a mere couple of extra points in test scores will not be worth the massive change in the education system. There is a possibility that this kind of education system can bring upon massive gender equality. For the most part of history, women were denied a proper education and basic rights. Who are we to abolish a thousand years of struggle for gender equality by establishing separate single sex schools so we can perform better academically?

    Reply
  16. Tanzeel H.

    Tanzeel Hak
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English, Period 2
    15 March 2013

    Education is essential in this competitive world. Especially at a moment like this when there is a high unemployment rate. Employers are hiring people who will be the best fit to work at their companies and the first thing they look at in an applicant is how far they went within the education system. Within the unemployed are thousands people who did not make it further than high school. Being a college graduate is key to stand out to employers within the millions without jobs. Should we do everything in our power to increase the percentage of students going to college, even if it , meant to change the whole school system to where males and females attended different schools? Affro argues that students would be more likely to go to college if they were attending single-sex institutions, but is that the best approach? No, it is not because his argument is not as logical as it seems. Affro is comparing private and public schools’ and the percentage at which their students go to college by saying it is higher among private school strictly because they are often single-sex institutions. Going to public single-sex institutions would not give the same percentage of students who go to college compared to students that attend private single-sex institutes. There is a deeper meaning behind why the students that attend private single-sex schools are more likely to go to college. Affro is implying that the only reason why majority of students at these institutions get further education is because they are not distracted by the opposite sex and it leads to more concentration in school. The key word in his argument is “private” single-sex institutions.

    Private schools offer a better education, which could be explanation on why more of their students go to college. In a recent study brought to my attention on Yahoo news reports, “In private educational institutions, teachers and administrators can afford not only up-to-date books and technologies…” These students receive newer books and most importantly, technologies. They are ahead of us, these students get to take advantage of the advance world of technology whereas public schools could only dream to do so. Having technology within a school system can be so beneficial to help students learn. Another quote within the same article explains, “In a public high school, you have three different tracks of study: Career Prep… College Tech Prep…, and College Prep for the smart kids. In a private high school, you have… a Ivy League Prep, and the other, if it exists, is college or university prep. If you’re smart and you work hard, you will graduate high school and transition into one of these $50,000+ USD per year institutions of higher education.” The students that go to private schools have different classes than us, which can set them up for success when applying to schools such as an IVY League. In this instance we can see that gender does not conflict with why students in private schools go to college more often than public high school students.

    Another difference among both types of schools are the students. In this Yahoo article it states that in public school the students that do care about their future, “Work hard in school for the sake of getting smarter in order to be able to earn money to support yourself in this world.” I can completely agree with this because among all of the students I have met say that they only put effort into school now, so they can get into college, then get a job that will have a high salary where they can buy what they want. Another quote affirms that a high percent of private school students, “Work hard in school for the sake of learning and becoming a more well-rounded, educated member of society.” Just by looking up people who attended private schools and the person they have become, such as Bill Gates, I feel that this quote is quite accurate. Students that go to public and private schools just have different mentalities.

    After looking through multiple resources the same two factors came up that differentiated public and private schools, the teachers and class sizes. One article presents that, “Private high school teachers usually have a first degree in their subject. A high percentage – 70-80% – will also have a masters degree and/or a terminal degree.” A lot of students and teachers especially at Hayward High can agree that there are many teachers that are incompetent of teaching well. Since I began school I could probably only say a handful of teachers knew what they were doing and taught well. A different article asserts, “Teachers spent copious amounts of time dealing with these kids.” Due to the smaller class sizes in private schools the teachers can have a stronger relationship with their students, which can really help students learn. Students can be given more attention and it would be easier for the teacher to meet every students’ needs. Teachers usually have a huge impact on students.

    Getting an education beyond high school is necessary, especially in this day and age. Everyone has to go to college, although Affro’s proposal to have all public schools become single-sex is not the way to ensure students make it to college. . Having single-sex institutions will not solve the low percentage of public school students going to college. If we were to go ahead and create single-sex institutions throughout the nation, where no student would ever be able to attend school with the opposite sex there still would be a huge gap between the chances of students going to college. The students that would attend these single-sex public schools would not have what is necessary to have high percentages such as private school because they would not have the money to have new books, advanced technology, teachers that are definitely qualified, small class sizes, the best prep classes, and also the same mentality.

    Reply
  17. Alicia Gonzales

    Alicia Gonzales
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11
    15 March 2013
    Affo’s argument is that students being in a co-ed classroom, meaning those of the opposite sex is a distraction. He believes that people in private school with the same sex have a better chance of graduating high school and getting into college compared to those in a public schools. He implies that the students in public schools are distracted by their opposite sex, therefore do not have as big of a chance as reaching their full potential.
    I somewhat agree with Affo’s argument, yet I somewhat disagree, because it is true. What I notice from my experiences of being in public school, is that the majority of peoples’ main focus isn’t school. Most people spend their time and energy on other things that aren’t as important. But it seems like private schools are more strict, and very much focus on education. I see it in movies, I’ve seen it with some of my friends, and I’ve seen it with my own experiences. If I went to an all girl’s school, then I’d probably be able to give all my attention on school as well, but being that I’m in a public school, of course there are going to be other things that I am focused on as well besides just academics.

    Reply
  18. Dominique

    Dominique N.
    Ms. Keeble
    APENG 11 Per 2
    14 March 2013

    In his passage, S. Affo argues that the two genders work better when separated from each other. He incorporates the use of statics to support his claim, and describes how students have a higher chance of getting into college if they are put into single-sex schools. I do not agree with Affo’s assertion at all because I believe that the opposite genders are not a distraction like Affo implies them to be.
    I do not agree with Affo’s assertion because of my own personal experiences. I feel that mixed gender classrooms provide an environment that is easier and more inviting to be in than a single-sex one. For example, when the teacher splits up the class to go against the opposite gender on teams for a debate, I feel as if my thoughts are restricted and limited. I cannot get a complete point of view from just other girls, the boys may have a similar or different perspective that I do not get the chance to hear. I also get more distracted when put with all girls, for I end up gossiping about topics irrelevant to school. The separation of genders is not something that will make us strive further independently.
    Another reason why I do not agree with Affo’s assertion is from my observations. I have observed many times how the genders act when around each other and when not. There is no observation I saw that would prevent the opposite gender from distracting the other. My uncle also told me how he went to an All Boys Catholic school for high school and explains how it was a strange experience. He said he was able to focus better, but that did not give him any educational boost. My aunt on the other hand when to a mixed gender public school and both she and my uncle got into UC Berkeley. This shows that the opposite genders are not distractions to the other’s education.
    In conclusion, I do not agree with Affo’s assertion because I think it is pure foolishness. From observations, I believe most people actually work better when in a mixed gender environment, but yet there are a few others who are more comfortable with strictly their own. I believe it based on how the person was raised when it comes to comfortable working environments. I think we should continue to keep the classrooms mixed with both genders so that way we can collaborate with and benefit one another.

    Reply
  19. Oscar G.

    Oscar G
    Period 1
    S. Affo believes that classrooms should be separated by gender, male and female, so that they can pursue a higher education beyond high school. In his thoughts, Affo believes that the student should develop his/her social skills out of the class room, while at the same time this action should cut about most of the in-class distractions. Affo gathers his thought by recalling, “Consider that private schools, which are often single-sex institutions, send a higher percentage of their students to college than do public schools.” But I believe differently than Affo, I believe that it is only within the student’s mighty will to continue on with a better education. Because it has been seen all throughout history, with so many people that can be named it would be unfair to just name one. Teachers today can notice when one student out of his/her thirty other students will succeed, the teacher will not always admit it but they know who will and will not give the extra effort. I believe it is in the student’s desire that he/she will put apart all distractions and take into action his/her education to the next level. Having coeducational classrooms today has no impact on they wait the information is giver nor absorbed. Throughout my years of being in school being in a room with both genders have truly been a wonderful experience and it would be a shame to stop this opportunity for the young people because one person, Affo, stated himself against coeducational beliefs.

    Reply
    1. Oscar G.

      Oscar G.

      In his passage, S. Affo argues that students in the educational system are better off to be separated by gender, meaning boys with boys and girls with girls. Affo uses statistics to back up his claim in order to point towards the fact that students are better off being educated in single gender classes. Although I do partially agree with Affo my thoughts beg to differ from Affo’s.

      Affo provides the reader with many perspectives to look at his argument. He states that with single gender classes there shall be less distractions in the classroom. I for sone do not agree with this particular idea of Affo’s. I believe that any individual student can find his/her way around any in-class distraction. Because it has been proven that a student that has the guts and will to learn will surpass any thrown obstacle in his/her way. Which sums up my point given, that it is up to the student’s hunger for education that will keep him/her on track with the class.

      My mix of ideas comes when Affo points out that students should develop his/her social skills out of the classroom. Now, in every class there is always an ‘outcast’ that does not socialize with the other students. Sometimes they choose to behave that way, but then again they are timid/shy when speaking to new people. The majority of in-school friendships start out with group work assigned in class. On the other hand, if students develop these social skills out of the class, they are going to have a ‘style’ of having/making new friendships. It allows them to be different from the group, allows them to stand out from the crowd. Social skills have an impact on modern day society, but should that ‘skill’ be taught in class? I think so.

      In conclusion, not many students may benefit from Affo’s ideas. Nor would they suffer if classes stay coeducational. Although my thoughts are not certain like those of Affo’s, I believe that the school system should stay the same, in the sense of coeducational classes.

      Reply
  20. Diana Larios

    Diana Larios
    AP English 11
    Keeble
    Period: 1
    13 March 2013

    S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms will improve academic performances while also increasing the percentage of students going to college. Personally I don’t agree 100% with Affo’s argument because there are many disadvantages at hand. For example, attending a school that’s all male or all female will deprive you of being able to comfortable socialize with the opposite sex. That in the long run will create a negative effect when it comes to the work place. Social skills are more prominent to have which would be a struggle for these students because new situations and surroundings that will be out of their conforms zones. Also, aside from school it will be an arduous task to build an intimate relationship with the opposite sex because of the fact that it’s all a new idea, the foundation of comfort will not be present. Even tough class time would be somewhat more productive academically, the long term effects are more important.

    Reply
    1. Diana Larios

      Diana Larios
      AP English 11
      Keeble
      Period: 1
      13 March 2013

      S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms will improve academic performances while also increasing the percentage of students going to college. Even though there would be some positive effects from making this drastic change a norm in all schools, personally, I would have to disagree with Affo’s argument because there are many disadvantages at hand.
      Affo states that class time would be much more productive in a same-sex classroom but I believe that attending a school that’s all male or all female will deprive you of comfort when it comes to socializing with the opposite sex. That in the long run will create a negative effect when it comes to the work place.
      When thinking about the long term effect, it will affect the way one behaves around the opposite sex in a more professional setting. Social skills are more prominent to have which would be a struggle for these students to obtain because new situations and surroundings that will be out of their comfort zones will make it more difficult for them to adapt.
      Now, Affo states that by separating schools by gender will increase the number of students going to college, partially correct for the fact that maybe there would be a higher percentage of concentration because distractions will be eliminated but aside from school it will be an arduous task to build an intimate relationship with the opposite sex in the future because of the fact that it’s all a new idea, the foundation of comfort will not be present.
      Finally, even though Affo’s makes a persuasive argument that class time would be somewhat more productive academically and the number of students going to college will increase , I firmly believe that the long term effects are more important therefor we should not make the change in the schools.

      Reply
  21. Sidney

    Sidney
    Keeble
    Ap English
    Affo’s argument is that same sex classrooms can be helpful to a pupil. She suggests that in following this there is a possibility of equaling out the sexes in colleges and brings up more males to the plate. As Affo mentions, students in one sex private schools are most likely to go to colleges, I believe this because not only are they away from major distractions but they are also richer and can afford anything need. I don’t think it has anything really to do with a student’s education but ability to pay for college. Woman are the ones to get into college more often now because that is the only way to get out of societies cast and out do men. Men are portrayed differently then woman. Women are supposed to be nurturing and sensitive while men are supposed to be tough, and leaders. When it comes to the classroom boys are normally the ones who are out there and energetic while the girls shy away. When it comes to the real world if men are surrounded by men they are just going to respect men and woman have worked to hard for that. Kids need to learn how to socialize amongst themselves better before they run into each other in college. I have noticed that in some minorities the boys shy away from school on their own no matter whether it is coed or not. For example, when I spoke to an old friend of mines, I asked him why he hadn’t continued in school even though he was one hundred percent eligible. His response was he had to work to raise money for his sister’s tuition and maybe eventually he would get back to it. I believe that if you want to raise the numbers in male attendance at universities you have to get a program to encourage young minority males to do it.

    Reply
    1. Sidney

      Sidney
      Keeble
      AP English
      17 March 2013
      In the passage, S. Affo argues that same sex classrooms can be helpful and advantageous to a pupil. She suggests that in consequence there is a possibility of equaling out the sexes in colleges and heightens the possibility of graduation for men. Although separating the genders in school can be beneficial, making same sex education possible takes away grand opportunities.
      When it comes to the real world if men are surrounded by men they are just going to respect men and not woman. For example in the workplace, Men are portrayed differently then woman. Women are supposed to be nurturing and sensitive while men are supposed to be tough, and leaders. It has been said that men are the preferred boss, and have a higher possibility of promotion than women; due to the respect they are given. While is school children should be taught to be given equal opportunity.
      The opposite sex naturally serves as a distraction, being that our instinct is to reproduce. So it is logical to desire elimination of such a distraction but actually doing so would be unnecessary. Men and Woman have arguably one purpose and that is to reproduce. As Affo mentions, students in same sex private schools are most likely to go to colleges, I believe this is true because not only are they away from major distractions but they are also richer and can afford anything they need. I don’t think it has anything really to do with a student’s education but in reality the ability to pay for college. Kids need to learn how to socialize among themselves before they are forced to in college.
      The privileged private school kids are seen to have better graduation rates for the reason that they have easier ways in, with alumnae family members and greater opportunities. Comparing them to privileged private school kids is invalid. I have noticed that in some minorities the boys shy away from school on their own no matter whether it is coed or not. For example, when I spoke to an old friend of mines, I asked him why he hadn’t continued in school even though he was one hundred percent eligible. His response was he had to work to raise money for his sister’s tuition and maybe, eventually, he would get back to it. I believe that if you want to raise the numbers in male attendance at universities you have to get a program to encourage young male minorities. Woman are the ones to get into college more often now because that is the only way to get out of societies cast and out do the men who wish to control them.
      Although separating the genders in school can be beneficial, making same sex education possible takes away grand opportunities. So Coed schools will always have a problem with mingling students but it’s natural and serves as experience for the real world.

      Reply
  22. Alexis l.

    S. Affo argues that same sex schools are beneficial to the success students. Affo claims that students learn more efficiently in same sex classrooms than regular intergated classrooms. He believes this because of the higher percentage of students sent off to college than integrated schools. I agree with Affo to an extent. If a student is more likely to become successful in life if he/she goes to a non integrated school then by all means allow them to. If sacrificing social experiences to become somwthing big in life, then yes it should be allowed. But those social experiences that are sacrificed may jeopardize ones ability to adapt in life. If there is a high possibilty of a student, who graduated from a non integrated highschool, failing then obviously the student should attend a mixed gender school. It all really comes down to funding and social experiences. A low budget school can still produce successful students and have a better chance of not lacking in social skills. Unlike a well funded school, which can produce more students that go to college but having a chance of acquiring low social skills. Integrated schools don’t put students at a disadvantage. The students acquire the same education but at a different budget. These students can also learn life skills such as speaking to the opposite gender. Unlike same gender schools that don’t fully know how the opposite gender’s appeals may be. Affo’s proposal has a positive outcome but it also comes with negatives.

    Reply
  23. Brittany-Ann D.

    Brittany-Ann V. Dela Cruz
    Keeble
    AP English
    15 March 2013

    S. Affo argues same-sex classrooms are more beneficial. Affro believes the expansion of single-sex education will increase the focus on academics and higher the percentage of students going to college. With Affo’s logical proof and my own personal experience, I can agree that same-sex education will improve the schooling program tremendously.

    Using the facts and content from Affo’s reading, we can conclude same-sex education is positive. She states, “But many educators contend that boys and girls both do better when taught separately.” This proves teachers themselves, who know the capabilities of their students, believe in Affo’s understanding. There is no point in having mixed classrooms if the students are not doing the best they can. Affo also states, “…single-sex institutions, send a higher percentage of their students to college…” The main goal of high school is to prepare students for college. If we take Affo’s side, we are only making it better for students to reach success. The facts prove same-sex education is a way to improve the schooling program.

    From personal experience, I also agree same-sex education is beneficial. In a class with all females, I am more willing to speak out and focus on the content. I am no longer humble, but fighting over the others to answer the next question. In additionally, I am more competitive to be the best. With a class full of girls, you are naturally vicious and greedy. You always want to be the girl with the most excellent test grades, the one with the greatest speaking and writing skills, and even most outgoing personality. With same-sex education, students will fight and strive even harder.

    Through logical proof and personal experience, I agree that Affo’s insertion of same-sex education is favorable.

    Reply
  24. Yarelli Lopez

    Yarelli Lopez
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English Language & Composition
    Friday, March 15, 2013

    S. Affo argues that having single-sex classrooms would make both genders equally successful, instead of just women. I strongly disagree with his argument because having single-sex classes would make a strong competition among both genders, which would create a lot of unnecessary chaos. He supports his argument by using private schools as an example, yet he doesn’t mention the exact percentage. Affo loses credibility as he does not mention the reason why private schools get more students to college. The reason behind that is money; parents that have their children in private schools have to give monthly payments, unlike public schools, that there are no costly payments due. Also in my own opinion, it is in the student’s hand to go to college or not. Not on being with the same gender all throughout their years in school. In today’s society, we must have very diverse campuses in order to get ready for the outside world, which bring both genders together.

    Reply
  25. Gonzalo Haro

    Gonzalo Haro

    Affo argues that many private schools that separate students by gender tend to make it into college, and making a public school like that will probably produce more college-bound students. I both agree and disagree with Affo because he/she has a good point, but ultimately I disagree. A good point would be that students could focus more on classwork instead of socializing in the classroom. But other than that I think segregating schools by gender is a bad idea. Students should be able to be in a school setting where everything is integrated. I also think that interaction with the opposite sex is important. It helps humans develop and lets their minds explore. Restraining people from an environment in which the sexes are separated is not going to do a benefit towards their social skills. For example, my dad went to a male-only school in Mexico when he was a kid, and he says that him and his classmates felt sheltered in a way because they weren’t exposed to the opposite sex. Even thought gender-segregation might be beneficial for learning about school subjects, but it’s counter-beneficial when it comes to social skills, which are the skills that are most important in life.

    Reply
    1. Gonzalo Haro

      Gonzalo Haro

      Affo argues that many private schools that separate students by gender tend to make it into college, and do better in school, and making a public school like that will probably produce more college-bound students. Affo also argues that by gender-segregating schools, education will be improved.

      I both agree and disagree with Affo because he/she has a good point, but ultimately I disagree. A good point would be that students could focus more on classwork instead of socializing in the classroom. But other than that I think segregating schools by gender is a bad idea. Students should be able to be in a school setting where everything is integrated. I also think that interaction with the opposite sex is important. It helps humans develop and lets their minds explore. For example, my dad went to a male-only school in Mexico when he was a kid, and he says that him and his classmates felt sheltered in a way because they weren’t exposed to the opposite sex. Restraining people from an environment in which the sexes are separated is not going to do a benefit towards their social skills.

      Even thought gender-segregation might be beneficial for learning about school subjects, it’s counter-beneficial when it comes to social skills, which are the skills that are most important in life. Affo’s argument does not view social interaction as important, and gender-segregation deprives students of that.

      Reply
  26. Rachael B.

    Rachael B.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11, Per. 2
    14 March 2013

    S. Affro believes that single-sex classrooms are more beneficial than integrating the genders. Affro claims that students in a sole gender based class are more likely to learn more and the probablility of them going to college is heightened. This is something I do not agree with. Single-sex schools does not necessarily determine how well students will learn or whether they will get into college.
    Gender is something that should not really affect how a student learns. The way a student learns and picks up information really depends on him or her. The educational world is not based on gender. Majority of the time, schools are integrated like colleges. None that I have heard of were solely one gender. In the testing scores of the Higher School Certificate from Australia of 2010 I have once looked at, the highest scoring went to a school that was co-educational and the second highest went to a single-sex school. The difference between scores was not near each other as it showed the co-educational school was above by about eighteen percent which is quite significant. This shows that gender based classrooms do not determine how superior the students test. Students can do as well or even better in an integrated school.
    Co-educational schools also allow students to have better social skills with the opposite gender. They have more of a diverse friendship which is beneficial if one wants to have progress in life outside of school. They are not pressured into conforming into what a a male should be or what a female should be as they would be in a single-sexed classroom. Girls and boys who enter college straight from an single-sex school do not know how to communicate with the other gender as well as those from co-ed. In an article I once read by Anita Vachharajani, she explains her experience of going to college from an all girls school. She says, “Boys were exotic creatures for us. We only met them inside the pages of books. In college, where they appeared in human form, we had no idea what to say to them.” She clearly did not know how to communicate with the opposite gender, let alone be in their presence. Without such communication, there is no way to advance further in a situation without the two opinions from each sex.
    Integrated schools are not as bad as they may seem compared to single-sex schools. Co-ed schools can be advance educationally and socially while the others only benefit students academically since they are not communicating with the opposite gender.

    Reply
  27. Alexia G. (period 1)

    Affro’s argument is that same sex education is beneficial because it tends to make students more successful. This is a controversial issue that many do not have the same views on. He supports his argument with logical appeals showing it allows the students to focus more on the schooling and leaves social skill development for outside of class. I do agree with Affro because integrated sex classes are more of a distraction. When in class, it is important that the main focus is strictly education.

    Affro’s main argument is same sex schooling will help balance the college rate between the two genders. He says same sex schooling will “perhaps closes the gap that is growing as more women than men go to college,” which is a legitimate backbone to his argument. In many of my classes, and like most other schools, there are more women and they tend to be in the top of the class. With separate sex classes, there will be more competition between the men to be in the top too.

    Integrated sex classes interrupt academics. There are students who are not mature enough to be mixed with the growing opposite sex. Too many students do not take advantage of education nor do they use it wisely. The way to get the students’ goal to be successful and proceed to college is by keeping education strict and make same sex education a norm.

    Reply
    1. Alexia G. (period 1)

      1. Affro’s argument is that same sex education is beneficial because it tends to make students more successful. This is a controversial issue that many do not have the same views on. He supports his argument with logical appeals showing it allows the students to focus more on the schooling and leaves social skill development for outside of class. I do agree with Affro because integrated sex classes are more of a distraction. When in class, it is important that the main focus is strictly education.

      Affro’s main argument is same sex schooling will help balance the college rate between the two genders. He says same sex schooling will “perhaps closes the gap that is growing as more women than men go to college,” which is a legitimate backbone to his argument. In many of my classes, and like most other schools, there are more women and they tend to be in the top of the class. With separated sex classes, there will be more competition between the men to strive to be in the top of their class.

      Many say integrated sex classes help the students interact and communicate with each other in preparation of the real world. But, high school interactions are not mature enough. Parents do not send their children to school to interact; they want them learning. Other concerns may be about comfort level. It is more beneficial for the same sex to learn together because they have similar characteristics and ideas.

      In conclusion, integrated sex classes interrupt academics. There are students who are not yet mature to be mixed with the growing opposite sex. Too many students do not take advantage of education nor do they use it wisely. The way to get the students’ goal to be successful and proceed to college is by keeping education strict and make same sex education a norm.

      Reply
  28. Arileni N

    Ari N.
    Keeble
    Period 5

    S.Affo argues how schools/classrooms should be separate into single-sex classrooms because he claims that students learn better in a single-sex classroom for example he mentions private schools and how they have a higher percentage in students getting accepted into colleges than public school students. That’s because private schools have more money that goes to different education funds while most public schools don’t have the same amount of money private school have. In my opinion I don’t think that the integration of sexes has a lot to do with the performances of the students. I do think that there’s a point where you can get distracted because you might be attracted to the opposite sex but that’s normal. For Example my freshmen year I had a friend(boy) who was a senior and he had a couple of girls that liked him and he did have a girlfriend but that did not distract him from getting accepted into a 4-year university. To conclude I dissagre with S.Afro’s claim.

    Reply
    1. Arileni N

      S.Affo argues hows students should be separated by same-sex schools and classrooms.Affo explains how students being in the same-sex environment can benefit and help many students in their education.To support his claim he says that students in private schools are better then public schools because a higher percentage of the students in private schools get accepted into college than public schools. I would agree with Affo’s claim.
      For example on reason i would agree with his claim is because students that attend private schools they have a higher percent of doing well in school because they are paying for their education, which makes them work harder because they are paying for their education and they don’t want their money to go to waste.
      Another reason i would agree with Affo’s agreement is because students are usually distracted when the opposite sex is around for example girls, when their is a group of them together and they have something due they will work together to get that done, unlike some of the guys in my classes that when they are assigned in groups they will only sit there and not help with the group but they will still get credit for something that they didn’t help with.
      In conclusion I agree with Affo’s agrument because not just the way he has his facts set up and how he explains it but because i have also experienced with this how a same-sex class can affect the way students learn.

      Reply
  29. Ryan C.

    S. Affo’s argument about single-sex education is that boys and girls do better when taught separately. Affo also argues that a higher percentage of students will go to college because of single sex education and close the gap between women and men in college. I would disagree with Affo’s argument on single sex education because of multiple reasons. One is that Affo’s statistics are coming from private schools. Those statistics does not reflect better education because of single sex education because private schools charge tuition and are already statistically better than public schools. People that have money to send their kids to private schools usually support their and push them to stride better. Also private schools generate a great amount of money to back up their school; compared to public schools they don’t have the money to back themselves up. So private schools are able to support their students better than public schools. Another reason why I don’t agree with Affo, is because my cousin goes to a single sex school for men. Yes, it is true that he developed social skills outside of school, but he doesn’t handle girls as well as I do and he associates in skeptic ways, like online dating. My cousin is also supported by money for tuition and money for extra classes and I would say he is about the same level as me in education. I’m also afraid that when my cousin goes to college, he might not be able to handle the way the world is; which is men and women together. So I think that single sex education wouldn’t make much of difference at all in student education but will just be a money pit for others.

    Reply
    1. Ryan C.

      S. Affo’s argument about single-sex education is that boys and girls do better when taught separately. Affo also argues that a higher percentage of students will go to college because of single sex education and close the gap between women and men in college. His argument may seem reasonable but it is flawed in many ways. I would disagree with Affo’s argument on single sex education because of multiple reasons.

      One reason is that Affo’s statistics are coming from private schools. Those statistics does not reflect better education because of single sex education because private schools charge tuition and are already statistically better than public schools. People that have money to send their kids to private schools usually support their and push them to stride better. Also private schools generate a great amount of money to back up their school; compared to public schools they don’t have the money to back themselves up. So private schools are able to support their students better than public schools.

      Another reason why I don’t agree with Affo, is because my cousin goes to a single sex school for men. Yes, it is true that he developed social skills outside of school, but he doesn’t handle girls as well as I do and he associates in skeptic ways, like online dating. My cousin is also supported by money for tuition and money for extra classes and I would say he is about the same level as me in education. I’m also afraid that when my cousin goes to college, he might not be able to handle the way the world is; which is men and women together. So I think that single sex education wouldn’t make much of difference at all in student education but will just be a money pit for others.

      In conclusion, the way Affo backs up his argument may seem believable but it comes from a source that has various results. So in the end, his evidence is not a hundred percent true. If the goal is to get better education for students, then all students should go to private schools.

      Reply
  30. Niauni

    Niauni Hill
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English, Period 1
    14 March 2013

    S. Affo argues that single sex classrooms will be more beneficial for both girls and boys. S. Affo also argues that S. Affo argues that single sex classrooms will indeed increase their chances into getting accepted into universities, rather than lower class colleges. I strongly disagree with S. Affo, because I belive having girls and boys in the same classes interacting with one another is another strong communication skill that can be built. Without boys and girls sharing learning space I feel like one of the genders’ will be subjected to a one sides opinion. The benefit of boys and girls sharing the same learning space is the chance to interact with different people in a different light and being able to get the other sides’ opinion. I recall a while back when I was in a classroom learning where majority of people had no voice. The boys did not speak and the girls talked too much. Interacting with all females got sickening and made me want a guys’ input on certain situations. Even though we all are people, boys tend to have a different view on certain things. The boys I have class with typically have a lot to say. Maybe S. Affo believes boys and girls being in separate learning environments is a positive thing because he believes boys are easily distracted by girls… This is not the case, it depends on what learning environments you are actually in. If the instructor is doing their job correctly, focus shall remain on the lesson. In my AP English class, rarely boys get off task…Why? The teacher keeps the attention on the lesson and him/herself.

    Reply
    1. Niauni

      S. Affo argues that single sex classrooms will be more beneficial for both girls and boys. S. Affo also argues that single sex classrooms will indeed increase their chances into getting accepted into universities, rather than lower class colleges. I strongly disagree with S. Affo, because I belive having girls and boys in the same classes interacting with one another is another strong communication skill that can be built. Without boys and girls sharing learning space I feel like one of the genders’ will be subjected to one sides opinion. The benefit of boys and girls sharing the same learning space is the chance to interact with different people in a different light and being able to get the other sides’ opinion. I recall a while back when I was in a classroom learning where majority of people had no voice. The boys did not speak and the girls talked too much. Interacting with all females got sickening and made me want a guys’ input on certain situations. Even though we all are people, boys tend to have a different view on certain things. The boys I have class with typically have a lot to say. Maybe S. Affo believes boys and girls being in separate learning environments is a positive thing because he believes boys are easily distracted by girls… This is not the case, it depends on what learning environments you are actually in. If the instructor is doing their job correctly, focus shall remain on the lesson. In my AP English class, rarely boys get off task…Why? The teacher keeps the attention on the lesson and him/herself.

      Reply
  31. Jonathan v

    Jonathan V
    Ms. Keeble
    Period 1
    Ap Eng and Comp

    S. Affro makes a valid argument that can mesmerize any reader that agrees with him but some may not agree. Affro argues that same sex classrooms can actually boost up where the boy or the girl is going to end up. I do not agree with this argument because many people that have come out of integrated girl and boy school have actually made it far in higher education. Affro does mention private school and how the teachers there have the dedication and attention to one student. She has a point in pointing out that the public school system does not spend that extra minute with the student but public school does give that sense of collaboration with one another that in the future will help them expand their social web. Even though the same sex class does create that sense of partnership between girls and girls or vice versa, maybe one will end up somewhere else causing a sense of betrayal in the coming future. It depends on how long a student spends in private school to adjust to that same cycle of everyone being the same, not being able to perceive different perspectives the world might bring up to them when they come out of their shell. Being in the same gender classroom does not give an individual the boost others may receive. There is no warranty that the student will make it the same distance, and after being around the same people, adjust to a new society outside their comfort zone.

    Reply
    1. Jonathan v

      Jonathan V
      Ms. Keeble
      Period 1
      Ap Eng and Comp

      S. Affro makes a valid argument that can mesmerize any reader that agrees with him but some may not agree. Affro argues that same sex classrooms can actually boost up where the boy or the girl is going to end up. I do not agree with this argument because many people that have come out of integrated girl and boy school have actually made it far in higher education. Affro does mention private school and how the teachers there have the dedication and attention to one student. She has a point in pointing out that the public school system does not spend that extra minute with the student but public school does give that sense of collaboration with one another that in the future will help them expand their social web.
      Even though the same sex class does create that sense of partnership between girls and girls or vice versa, maybe one will end up somewhere else causing a sense of betrayal in the coming future. It depends on how long a student spends in private school to adjust to that same cycle of everyone being the same, not being able to perceive different perspectives the world might bring up to them when they come out of their shell. Being in the same gender classroom does not give an individual the boost others may receive. In a public school there is more contribution between the sexes in projects and even sports. As in private schools, if there is a project there is going to be groups but their input to the project is going to be similar because girls like to do certain things their way and vice versa. There is no warranty that the student will make it the same distance, and after being around the same people, adjust to a new society outside their comfort zone.
      In conclusion, Affro make a very valid point in saying that private schools increase the odds of a single gender going into a higher education but her information isn’t all true. Even though a private can get a student ahead intellectually and socially ready to interact with only one gender, public school has integration of both sexes and different inputs that will help them in the broader social life of the future.

      Reply
  32. Lizeth Jacinto

    Lizeth Jacinto
    AP English
    Period:1
    S. Affo argues that the separation of genders could be beneficial. Affo argues that in classes on a single gender the educational progress is more that in a combine gender class. In my opinion Affo is not correct because is a person wants to do good will do good even if their in a bad I believe that having different genders in a class has its ups and downs. For example they get to experience how the whole world is in reality and how the opposite sex behaves. But a disadvantage is that this can be a distraction and keep them from learning. The single gender classes may have higher educational results that can be beneficial to one or to many in the future. But having both gender prepares the for the jobs and the real world.

    Reply
  33. Kiana Ledda

    Kiana Ledda
    Keeble
    AP English, Period 5
    14, March 2013
    S. Affo argues that single sex classrooms will be more beneficial for both genders’ education, and will also expand their opportunities with getting into universities. The issue with same sex classroom is a very controversial topic and has been looked into recently by Washington D.C leaders. I personally disagree with Affo’s argument because she is lacking solid evidence that single sex classrooms are more successful than in an all sex classrooms. The best way to educate the student academically and socially is through being in a both male and female environment. Students need to develop their social skills in order to interact with their peers. This is an important skill to obtain because in the real (business) world, these students will need to know how to socialize and interact with the opposite sex. For instance, in elementary school, children aren’t separated by gender because they are permitted to observe their surroundings. Stripping them of the opposite sex might affect them in a negative way based off their differences in interests. In addition, I know many students who attended public schools and have gone off to universities such as Riverside, UCLA, and SJSU, which are all great schools! However, I must agree with Affo when she suggests that single sex classrooms increase the student’s focus. In a single sex classroom, the student is able to focus more on their work, and isn’t distracted from the opposite sex. Regardless of these distractions, I still believe that separating genders in different classrooms is damaging to the students’ social skills and is also unnecessary because students in public schools get into universities as well as private schools.

    Reply
  34. Thomas T

    Thomas T
    Keeble
    Ap english
    Period 1

    S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms create students of both sexes with higher averages to attend universities than classrooms with both sexes. Though the argument seems just, I strongly disagree with this passage. Affo’s argument is extremely flawed and is easy to keep attention towards the flawed argument.

    Though the passage is short, Affo’s argument in same-sex classrooms is extremely flawed. She argues that same-sex classrooms prove to be more successful, but what schools have same-sex classrooms? She mentions private schools, many of which have already proven to be statistically better than public schools. The reason this argument is so flawed is because the need to achieve in private schools are greatly increased because students actually pay to be in private schools and are pressured to do well. Public school students are not pressured as much to succeed and aren’t given the extra incentive to succeed.

    Though some people might argue that same-sex classes are statistically better, Affo fails to deliver a half-decent argument. Using private schools as an example created a rather weak argument due to the many unaccounted factors.

    Reply
    1. Thomas T

      Thomas T
      Keeble
      Ap english
      Period 1

      S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms create students of both sexes with higher averages to attend universities than classrooms with both sexes. Though the argument seems just, I strongly disagree with this passage. Affo’s argument is extremely flawed and is easy to keep attention towards the flawed argument.

      Though the passage is short, Affo’s argument in same-sex classrooms is extremely flawed. She argues that same-sex classrooms prove to be more successful, but what schools have same-sex classrooms? She mentions private schools, many of which have already proven to be statistically better than public schools. The reason this argument is so flawed is because the need to achieve in private schools are greatly increased because students actually pay to be in private schools and are pressured to do well. Public school students are not pressured as much to succeed and aren’t given the extra incentive to succeed.

      It is true; why argue against something that has potential to increase our student’s success rates? Nothing bad may come out from same-sex classrooms, but how much is it necessary? It is extremely possible that single-sex classrooms could potentially create more discrimination towards women. Much of our education is revolved around our nation’s history and our nation’s history has crafted the way our society has become today. What could that possibly mean? Both sexes would not be able to see the intellectual capabilities the other sex has, but history had crafted society to become male dominant and can easily revert, assuming that we already don’t live in a male dominant society.

      Though some people might argue that same-sex classes are statistically better, Affo lacks greater argument because she uses private schools as an example. It already has been proven that a private school does extremely well compared to a public school, but Affo fails to consider private schooling as a factor as to why same-sex classes potentially do so well. Same-sex classrooms may prove to be more devastating than useful due to people’s failure to understand the other sex from personal experience and society has deemed social skills to provide an advantage. The classroom is an environment in which students learn together, not separately.

      Reply
  35. Valeria Diaz

    Valeria Diaz
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English
    Period 5
    14 March 2013

    S. Affo’s argument on having schools or classrooms of only one sex attending it states that perhaps only being with the same sex in school can help with people’s education. I have to agree that other people are a big distraction in school such as relationships and drama but their are also gays, bisexuals and lesbians attending school. I have to disagree with Affo wanting all schools to be all the same sex because being able to socialize with other people is a great experience for the real world. for example, if a girl attends an all gir school all of her life, she would not know how to handle situations where she has to communicate with a male. I believe it would be difficult for the girl because she does not know how men act because of the lack of communication in her past with males. It is great that Affo cares about peoples education by wanting a change but I will have to disagree in having a same sex school.

    Reply
  36. Alicia

    Alicia Oseguera
    AP English
    Ms. Keeble
    14 March 2013
    S. Affo argues that same- sex education will be something beneficial to the improvement of education sending more students to college. Affo argues that students learn better when in a class of their same gender than when they are mixed together and that teachers will be able to focus on academics not worrying about teaching their students social skills. I do not agree with Affo’s argument since going to a same –sex gender school has many disadvantages. When in a same –sex school many students miss the opportunity to know how to communicate with others and collaborate in the future. Going to a school that will only have women or vise versa only men will mean that women will not be used to talking to men and men would not be used to talking to women. This would cause them problems in the long run since when working they will have to learn how to work with people form their opposite sex. Learning this skill as a grown up is very difficult since the brain has already developed. Not only that but it will cause for the different genders to not be able to hear about both perspectives about the opposite gender. Women sometimes needs to hear about how a men sees the same situation or vise versa and in an all same sex school it is impossible.

    Reply
    1. Alicia

      Alicia Oseguera
      Ms. Keeble
      AP English
      17 March 2013

      The mixing or tangling of genders is something that cannot be stopped. In the society, life, work, or even education genders are always getting mixed having to communicate with each other or collaborate. Affro argues that single sex education is better than having both genders mixed together because she believes that students learn better when taught separately and teachers are able to focus on academics instead of teaching students to develop their social skills. She goes on to stating that same sex education will lead to improve the education in the long run. Although, Affro’s argument may seem concrete, I think that this argument is invalid because students being in same sex schools miss the opportunity of having strong communication skills with the opposite sex later on and it makes the different genders miss out on learning the different perspectives of the opposite gender in a certain topic.

      Having same sex education will make many of the students not have powerful communication skills with the opposite gender in the future, which will hinder their life in the long run. People that support Afro may argue that students will still have strong communication skills because they are still communicating with their same gender. His is not true because students learn to communicate with their opposite gender by interacting with each other since a very young age and this would not happen in a same sex education. As Affro stated, “ Teachers can focus in academics and let kids develop social skills outside of the classroom.” Affro is assuming that many of the students have time or have permission by their parents to go out after school to improve their communication skills with opposite genders. Now days many parents are very strict in terms of where they let their children go so the only way many students learn how to communicate with those of their opposite gender is through school. Those in a same sex school would miss out on this opportunity because they will just be surrounded by their same sex which will lead to later on not knowing how to communicate with those their opposite sex. Having a strong communication skill is what will help many of these students in their working field and being shy or caught of guard when they have to collaborate with someone of their opposite sex in their work will hinder their stay in the job. Affro’ argument of students learning their social skills outside of school is unfair because many students do not have the opportunity to socialize with others after school.

      Affro’s argument of having same sex education will prohibit the different genders from learning the distinctive perspectives of a certain topic since they would not have the opinion of the opposite gender. Many may say that students will learn or figure out the different perspective later on in their life but in high school it is when students are starting to figure out where they stand in a certain topic and missing out the opinion of the opposite gender will effect their position. Form my own experience; at this stage of my life that is high school is where I am starting to take a position in certain topics. For example, the topic of military and the drafting of male boys, in school I have the opportunity of hearing both perspectives of this topic form both a male and female. Hearing how a guy feels about the whole drafting process and how unfair it is since they only draft guys and not girls made me take a position and see that this process is unfair. But those students in a same sex school will miss out on hearing the opinion of the opposite sex leading them to take a position without hearing both sides.

      Going to college and getting the best education is something hat is important for many students but this has nothing to do with the students going to a school of the same sex or a public school. Affro’s arguments of saying that students will get the opportunity of learning their social skills by them selves is something that is irrelevant since in high school it is when many students start to develop and make their social skills strong. Also, separating the genders in a school will lead to students missing out on the different perspectives of a topic hindering the position they take. Thereof, this makes the arguments of Affro irrelevant and not true since same sex education will not help the students in any way it will just effect them more.

      Reply
  37. Abraham N.

    Abraham N.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11
    Period 5
    14 March 2013

    S. Affo’s opinion of single sex classrooms as a better way of kids and teens to get their education, is a faulty opinion that I do not agree with because Affo does not have any proof that students in same sex classrooms have better grades than students in integrated classrooms. Even though she says that most educators, “contend” that students do better in a same sex class, it is not enough proof unless a study was done, and the study on the private school students is different because private schools usually have a lower student in the classroom rate compared to the public school system, and private schools also have a better education, mostly because they pay for their education and if I was paying tens of thousands of dollars for my kid to get a “better education”, I expect my kid to be going to college. S. Affo concludes that same sex classrooms will help close the gap of more women going to college than men, but even with more women attending college lately, it is not like men are trailing far behind and not all colleges are women dominated like for instance, during my college trips to Southern California, one college called Cal Poly San Luis Obispo actually has more males than females attending the school, so their are still some school that are male dominated.

    Reply
  38. Natasha R

    Natasha R.
    Keeble
    Ap English
    Period 5
    14 March, 2013

    Affo suggests that sings sex education facilities should be taken into consideration because students learn better. Though I’d like to suggest otherwise, I believe that single sex institutions aren’t a good way of educating. By having mixed sex institutions, the students learn from one another and learn how to socialize with the different sex.
    When mixing females and males in learning environment, they each learn from one another.One sex institutions, for example in all girl school, most of them have the same views on certain topics. Some girls just ate guys do not care about them Camas that they’re just another girl going out of their lives. Yet this is it true, is both sexes for combined, they’d see that some guys want a serious relationship with a girl. Another way they’d learn is just in general, of how each gender sees the world. Classes discussions are ways to open up the ideas of the students. By stopping makes institutions it would stop the learning process of these young minds and bringing forth possible changes for the world.
    Just like when we were growing up were taught manners, the same thing applies when interacting with the opposite gender. If guys are not taught, for instance, how to act around girls like talking,behavior, or eating.It’s going to be awkward for the girl to be around him. An experience I had is when I was talking to a guy friend and he got a little carried away. He talking about girls in a inappropriate way as well as kind of pushing me, treating me as a guy. He wasn’t aware of how his actions affected me, that point I walked away because I was just respected by his behavior. Therefore having both genders interact, they’ll know how they’d like to be treated. If separate sex cool is a cheese, the views and morals of each gender will change, causing society to view they’re spheres differently.
    In conclusion, same gender institutions are the best ideas due to the lack of socializing with the other gender and educational experiences. Having integrated schools will allow the next generation to open their mind and learn from one another.Giving the world a better future.

    Reply
    1. Natasha R.

      Natasha R.
      Keeble
      Ap English
      Period 5
      14 March, 2013

      Affo suggests that same sex education facilities should be taken into consideration because students learn better. Though, I’d like to suggest otherwise, I believe that single sex institutions aren’t a good way of educating. By having mixed sex institutions, the students learn from one another and learn how to socialize with the different sex.
      When mixing females and males in learning environment, they learn from one another.One sex institutions, for example in all girl school, most of them have the same views on certain topics. Some girls suggest that guys do not care about them, that they’re just another girl going out of their lives. Yet this is it true, if both sexes for combined, they’d see that some guys want a serious relationship with a girl. Another way they’d learn is just in general, of how each gender sees the world. Class discussions are ways to open up the ideas of the students. By stopping makes institutions it would stop the learning process of these young minds and bringing forth possible changes for the world.
      Just like when we were growing up were taught manners, the same thing applies when interacting with the opposite gender. If guys are not taught, for instance, how to act around girls like talking,behavior, or eating.It’s going to be awkward for the girl to be around him. An experience I had is when I was talking to a guy friend and he got a little carried away. He began talking about girls in an inappropriate way as well as kind of pushing me,treating me as a guy. He wasn’t aware of how his actions affected me,at that point I walked away because I was just respected by his behavior. Therefore having both genders interact, they’ll know how they’d like to be treated. If separate sex schools is achieved, the views and morals of each gender will change, causing society to view their spheres differently.
      In conclusion, same gender institutions are the best ideas due to the lack of socializing with the other gender and educational experiences. Having integrated schools will allow the next generation to open their mind and learn from one another.Giving the world a better future.

      Reply
  39. Johan Ocegueda

    Johan Ocegueda
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English
    14 March 2013
    S. Affo argues that single sex education is controversial to the success of both genders. Affo claims that class rooms filled with only one sex is best for both the students and the teachers. In my opinion, Affo is not entirely correct. In man ways, separating the sexes can act positively, but it can also affect negatively. One example, is the experience the students get when they go to an all male school, or an all female school. Once they go on into a university, or onto the real world, they will have no type of experience with the opposite gender. They were trained to only interact with their own gender. Once they are put in a job, or just in any situation that involves the other gender they will be lost. An only one gender school can help, but life does not just involve one gender, there are two genders. So one way or another you will have to work with the other gender, might as well prepare for it.

    Reply
  40. Dennise Vazquez

    Dennise Vazquez
    Period 2

    S. Affo argues that students learn more in same sex classrooms and that in can increase the percentage of students that go to universities. Affo uses his personal experience and private institutions to persuade the reader that same sex classrooms are beneficial. I am in between his argument, I agree and disagree. The reason why I agree is because there is a lot of students who go to school to find their soul mate or to just have fun around girls or boys. Having in mind the thought that you want to find your soul mate or just checking someone out from your opposite sex can be distracting. Now, the reason why I disagree with Affo is because a student can be distracted by anything not just by someone who is from their opposite sex. At school we have a lot of students who have good grades and being mixed with a different gender does not prevent them from learning or a tending a university. We had a student last year named Alijah who came to Hayward High and as we know this school is a public school and he still managed to make it into Harvard one of the most recognized schools. This explains that it is on each students will if they want to go ahead and pay attention to someone who is from their different sex and get distracted or actually set those things aside and strive for a good education and to go to a university.

    Reply
  41. Rebekah Novak

    Rebekah Novak
    AP English
    Ms. Keeble

    The issue of whether or not the expansion of single-sex education should be sought is an issue many educators, leaders in Washington D.C, and specifically, A. Affro, has been argued over for quite a while. This is an important issue because it involves the wellbeing of student educators, students, and their future after college. A variety of different arguments have been put forward about this issue. This essay will consider not only the fact that same-sex education is a disadvantage to students when it comes to the interacting of the opposite sex later in life, but it also does little to prepare you for the real-world complications of opposite gender relations.

    Since the time I have started school, single-sex education has been viewed as absurd. As hard as it already is, to speak and converse with the stubborn ideals of men, and utter isolation of females from males only makes the situation harder. Myself, being a social-butterfly, can contest that although my interactions with men my age are well off, as the age increases, that becomes harder. The level of respect is changed and the overall male dominance is felt only because of their gender. For a lady to never experience interactions with a man until her matur years is quite a sad story.

    In conclusion, same-sex education is absurd and is a disadvantage to both young men and women. Our society is made up of both and therefore should always associate with both. The failure to do so would result in failure to communicate effectively in the workplace.

    Reply
  42. Zoey Madsen

    Zoey
    14 March 2013
    period 5

    S. Affo is arguing that male and female students should be taught separately in school to produce higher academic success between the two sexes. Affo uses information on private schools positive experiences with this teaching style to persuade her audience and create a valid proposal.
    I disagree with Affo’s belief to a certain extent. I believe a teaching environment isn’t fully academic without the opposing view of their male/female opposite gender’s opinion or point of view. However, I also believe that teaching the sexes separately can increase focus and the same sexes can relate to each other on many levels. I enjoy collaborating with my male classmates and enjoying educational conduct. Giving children the opportunity to experience education socially with both genders can be just as educational as the textbooks they are reading. Communication is a very important key to success, and it’s good for children to have the ability to do so in an educational environment.
    When I was in elementary school, I had a best friend named Jacob. He was the closest male friend I’ve ever had so far, even in the classroom. We shared our thoughts, which were completely different almost 80 percent of the time, and explored the playground together, gradually learning things about the environment. He influenced my knowledge of things and we both helped each other become more intelligent. We discovered how the difference in scenarios and opinions can affect a situation, because we both always had different ideas to deliver.
    Children should be academically influenced and broadened by whichever gender. The connection of genders can be a great thing, and it should be greatly taken advantage of.

    Reply
  43. Efrain E.

    Efrain E.
    AP English 11
    Period 1

    S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms are beneficial to the improvement of education and will send a higher percentage of students to university. Affo claims that these classrooms will allow teachers to focus on academics and that students learn better when with separated by sex. I do not completely agree with Affo’s argument. While there may be benefits to same-sex classrooms, there are also many potential disadvantages. For example, students who attend an all male school or all female school will not know how to interact with the opposite sex. No one is going to force them to talk to someone of the opposite gender, and they may go their entire lives in school without truly interacting and building relationships with members of the opposite sex. This could potentially lead to problems in the workplace because the students will be forced to work with both genders and may not understand the opposite gender. In addition, same-sex schools may have biased standards for teaching. In an all male school, the students will only get the male perspective on everything they learn and debate. They will never hear the perspective of a female. This is important because, as I have learned in many of my classes, females and males often have differing perspectives on important issues. If students are not exposed to many different perspectives, they will not get the same learning experience as students who go to integrated schools.

    Reply
    1. Efrain E.

      S. Affo argues that same-sex classrooms are beneficial to the improvement of education and will send a higher percentage of students to university. Affo claims that these classrooms will allow teachers to focus on academics and that students learn better when with separated by sex. I do not completely agree with Affo’s argument. While there may be benefits to same-sex classrooms, there are also many potential disadvantages. Students who grow up in a school with only males or only females may not know how to interact with someone of the opposite sex. They will also only learn from one perspective; they will never be taught from the opposite gender’s perspective.

      Students that go to a same-sex school might not see someone of the opposite gender very often. Unless they have a brother or sister at home, they will not have the opportunity to interact and learn with someone of the opposite gender. This may lead to problems later on in life when those boys and girls will have to interact with someone of the opposite gender on a daily basis. It may make communication difficult or awkward, which may result in a workplace where co-workers are uncomfortable or cannot work properly. It is much easier for a student of an integrated school to interact with members of the opposite sex. They have done it their entire lives. The other day I met a thirty year old man who serves as a teacher at an all boys school. He said that he is much more comfortable when he is around males than females. He told me and a few other guys that when he is around a lot of females he feels out of place and thrown off balance. The environment that he is in at an all boys school is unrealistic and makes even being around a large amount of women uncomfortable for him.

      While S. Affo claims that same-sex schools tend to send more students to college than public schools, she does not mention whether those students are successful or not. There could be a percentage of students that do go to college but drop out. Private schools might send more students to college now, but that might not be true in the future. Public schools offer many programs that help students make it to college. Programs like Puente and Avid send many students to college every year. These students do not go to just any college that will accept them; they go to competitive schools like Harvard, UCLA, USC, and UC Berkeley. Students do not have to be in same-sex classrooms to be successful and go on to college.

      While S. Affo believes that same-sex schools will help improve education in America, I believe it will not make much of a difference and may even hinder education. Students that grow up among members of the same sex may have trouble in the future, when they are forced to interact and even work with members of the opposite sex on a daily basis. They will only learn things from the perspective of their gender, and will not learn from the perspective of the other gender. Although private schools may send more students to college now, the resources that public schools have will allow even more students to advance into higher education.

      Reply
  44. Maria

    Maria
    AP English
    Period 1

    S. Affo argues that if we make classrooms single-sex there education is going to increase in the level of students who attend to college. Affo supports his argument by stating that private schools have a higher rate of sending students to colleges because they are single-sex schools. I totally disagree with Affo because making schools or classrooms single-sex will make people unaware of the outside world. Meaning that people would not get to interact as much and everything would just be different because our communication skills would not be as developed; we would not be as prepared to go into the outside world. I think it does not matter what gender there is in a classroom as long as you stay focused and do all your work. People who like to mess around in school will always mess around no matter what kind of gender surrounds them. Another reason why i do not agree with Affo is because public schools have a very low budget compared to private schools. It might be true that private school send more people into college, but it is not because they have single-sex classrooms but because they have the budget to buy their students all the materials that they need unlike public school who can barely afford them. I think this is not the way to increase the rate of students who go to college.

    Reply
  45. Raymond P

    Raymond P.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English 11
    14 March 2013

    In S. Affo argument about boy’s and girl’s explains that they should not be in the same classroom as each other. Affo’s claims that students will learn more if the classroom was single sex. A single sex classroom will provide the students with less distractions and more attention to the teacher. I somewhat disagree with Affo’s claim because throughout life these young adults would have to interact with the opposite sex later in their lives, it is better for them to be together in school rather than later in life. My perspective it is all upon on that child who does not pay attention in class because of the opposite sex, they have an option to learn or be distracted. Most private schools have single sex classes and there is a higher percentage of students go to college, this might be true but when the student gets to college they are going to have to be with the other sex. With this they might not know how to act around them. Males and females should be together in class together they would experience how it feels to be with the opposite sex then and later.

    Reply
    1. Raymond P

      Students who attend public schools are getting socially and prepared for the real world. Interacting acting with opposite sexes at a young age will prepare them and will not cause them to struggle. Be socially and mentally prepared is important because the sex would not be scared to approach them for a job interview or even on a professional level.

      Yes, private schools are sending more students to colleges than public schools. Not everybody could afford to send their child to a private school because of there social class. Many students who attend a public school do just fine because they know that school comes first and that they want to strive in life. My perspective is that the sexes should not be separated, it will cause a social disturbance within the student. Students bloom and come out of their comfort zone when they are around different sexes.

      Getting an education is highly important, but being with other is important as well. Students are different and they are not all the same. Dividing the students now will make a dramatic change since the students are so use to be with each other.

      Reply
  46. Veronica

    Veronica
    March 14, 2013
    AP English

    Affo’s primary argument is whether or not to have integrated classrooms in schools. Affro claims that students learn more efficiently in same sex environments which would increase the rate of not only women going to college, but also the rate of men attending college. Most of the students who are in single sex classrooms attend private school’s which would conclude in better educational opportunities for students, guaranteeing them to be accepted into college. These private schools have a higher income than a public schools which would result in the students gaining better educational opportunities such as better tutors, programs and teachers. I really don’t agree with Affro’s argument because the students in same sex classrooms would be loosing important interactions and different perspectives on how others would look upon things. I don’t think there would be a difference of having different sexes in a classroom since most people don’t care if they are sitting next to a guy. I don’t mind if I walk into a classroom that is integrated because I’m used to it and is a positive experience many people enjoy. For example, many students I know who graduated last year attend some of California’s top colleges and prospered not because of having integrated classes, but having the determination of going to college and making something of themselves so they wouldn’t have to get jobs they really don’t enjoy doing. Also, splitting up classes based on gender would show that guys and girls can’t interact with each other which sends the wrong message. Plus, segregating classrooms would make me wonder whether or not these public schools would turn into a private school and whether I could afford to attend this school. This would also make me remember of how African Americans and Whites were segregated which might bring back horrible events of history.

    Reply
    1. Veronica

      Veronica
      March 16, 2013
      AP English

      Affo’s primary argument is whether or not to have integrated classrooms in schools. Affro claims that students learn more efficiently in same sex environments which would increase the rate of not only women going to college, but also the rate of men attending college. Yes, he provides plausible evidence to back up his argument, but he doesn’t show the percentage of how many students from private schools get accepted to college.

      Most of the students who are in single sex classrooms attend private schools which would conclude in better educational opportunities for students, guaranteeing them to be accepted into college. These private schools have a higher income than a public schools which would result in the students gaining better educational opportunities such as better tutors, programs and teachers. I really don’t agree with Affro’s argument because the students in same sex classrooms would be loosing important interactions and different perspectives on how others would look upon things. In addition, if genders are separated from each other then this can cause problems later on when they are trying to apply for a job because they don’t have experience working with the opposite gender. This also causes problems as to making friends or being comfortable in a society where we are constantly having to work with others.

      I don’t think there would be a difference of having different sexes in a classroom since most people don’t care if they are sitting next to a guy or girl. I don’t mind if I walk into a classroom that is integrated because I’m used to it and is a positive experience many people enjoy. For example, many students I know who graduated last year attend some of California’s top colleges and prospered not because of having integrated classes, but having the determination of going to college and making something of themselves so they wouldn’t have to get jobs they really don’t enjoy doing. Also, splitting up classes based on gender would show that guys and girls can’t interact with each other which sends the wrong message. Plus, segregating classrooms would make me wonder whether or not these public schools would turn into a private school and whether I could afford to attend this school.

      In conclusion, I don’t agree with Affo’s claims since it’s not a hundred percent true that students learn more efficiently when they are in a same sex classroom because it’s upon the student whether or not he/she wants to prosper and attend college.

      Reply
  47. Dartise jones

    Dartise Jones
    March 14, 2013
    Ap english

    In this passage S.Affro’s argues that boys and girls learn more when separated from each other. By them getting separated it will close the margin between girls and boys going to college. He used private schools that are single sex institutions ,and how the students learn more. I disagree with Affro argument that separation of sexes will close the margin between boys and girls going to college. I think the reason why the private institution send more boys to college is because of funding not them being separated from girls. The private school have more resources and smaller classes which allows the students to get help when they need it. This ultimately helps them get to college not being away from girls. The other reason why they have more boys going to college is most of the student come from a wealthier family which allows them to get tutoring, and other resources that helps them do good in school.

    Reply
  48. Sarai P.

    Sarai P.
    AP English
    Keeble
    13 March 2013

    According to S. Affo, the separation of genders in the classroom will close the ever increasing gap between males and females moving on to higher education. While in theory, S. Affo’s proposal sounds plausible, it ultimately is not. In the novel, Cinderella Ate My Daughter, by Peggy Orenstein, a look at integrated education is expressed. After investigating multiple studies, Orenstein finally concedes that failure to expose children to a social setting of males and females, then future chances at relationships, whether personal or professional, are doomed to fail. The reason being that children are segregated do not learn how to comprehend each other. Aside from this, Affo brings up the fact that private single sex institutions are sending more and more students to Universities. While this may be true, little has to do with the gender segregation. In public school, many students do not have parents that know the utter importance of why continuing with education is important. For this same reason, students are lost to the whole process of college as opposed to those of private schools. In private schools, parents are not only well off , but well informed as to why school is so important, otherwise they would not be spending over $15,000 for a private school education. This idea can not only be identified as segregation, but also as discrimination. How would a student male or female who identifies as the opposite sex, feel about being forced to be in an all boy or an all female classroom? As can be imagined, they would not feel comfortable in the smallest bit.

    Reply
    1. Sarai P.

      Sarai P.
      AP English
      Keeble
      18 March 2013

      According to S. Affo, the separation of genders in the classroom will close the ever increasing gap between males and females moving on to higher education. While in theory, S. Affo’s proposal sounds plausible, it ultimately is ineffective and harmful.
      In the novel, Cinderella Ate My Daughter, by Peggy Orenstein, a look at integrated education is expressed. After investigating the outcomes of multiple studies, Orenstein finally concedes that failure to expose children to a social setting of males and females, harms future interactions, such as relationships, personal or professional. The primary reason of such being that children are segregated do not learn how to comprehend each other. This lack of comprehension will only further the belittlement of each gender, causing resentment.
      Aside from this, Affo brings up the fact that private single sex institutions are sending more and more students to Universities. While this may be true, little has to do with the gender segregation. In public schools, many students do not have parents that know the utter importance of why continuing on to higher education is important. For this same reason, students are lost to the whole process of college as opposed to those of private schools. In private schools, parents are typically well off, and committed to the idea of higher education. Yet they do not only have that, they are also well informed as to why school is so important, as well as how it can better any student’s life.
      This idea can not only be identified as segregation, but also as discrimination. How would a student male or female who identifies as the opposite sex, feel about being forced to be in an all boy or an all female classroom? As can be imagined, they would not feel comfortable in the smallest bit.
      In this ever evolving society, it is important to account for everyone’s opinion in order to produce a helpful solution. While yes, S. Affo’s suggestion can be seen as a good idea, it would open an abyss to be filled with hostility, anger, and belittlement.

      Reply
  49. Rachel N.

    Rachel N.
    Ms. Keeble
    AP English Language & Composition
    15 March 2013

    S. Affro’s claims that as a nation we will be able to send more students to college if we separate classes based on gender. He argues that students will be able to focus and retain information better on what they are learning. Affro concludes by stating that we should divide male and female classrooms so we can deliver more men to college. I disagree with Affro’s claim because in the future people will have to learn how to interact with the opposite sex and still remain engaged with what they need to complete whether it is in a professional setting or a personal one. For example, there have been various notable figures in society that went to sex integrated schools and attended college and beyond. People like Martin Luther King and Oprah Winfrey have had a prominent effect on society with going to mixed gender schools. Moreover, I disagree with Affro’s conclusion because with an immense lack of evidence he is already hastily generalizing that more males would go to college if we split classes based on gender. Various former seniors that I know who went to Hayward High have got in to prestigious colleges like UCLA, Cal Berkeley, and Harvard University. These people took responsibility and initiative for their education taking charge of their surroundings and not letting themselves get distracted. When it comes down to the last straw, it is not your environment that stops you from going to college, but your inner motivation. Your environment plays a big influence, but ultimately you maintain control of your own life. Splitting classrooms based on gender would not only send the wrong message that girls and guys can’t interact, but would also prevent a healthy school environment from prospering.

    Reply
  50. Desiree N.

    Desiree N.

    Ms. Keeble

    AP English 11

    13 March 2013

    S. Affro’s argument is about whether or not to integrate different sexes in school. Affro claims that students learn better in same sex classes. She concludes that since private schools; which are often single-sexed, have a higher percentage of their students going to college, a single- sexed classroom is better. This is a hasty generalization, just because the private schools were not integrated doesn’t mean that it is the best way for a school to function. Private schools probably have higher trained teachers because private schools have more money than public schools. I don’t believe that the integration of sexes is a disadvantage, I think it is an advantage because you get interaction with the opposite sex which you wouldn’t be able to do in an all girls school or an all boys school. I think it makes no difference to the way you learn if there is a girl sitting next to you or a boy, as long as everyone is working hard, everyone should succeed. For example, a guy I knew who went to Hayward High last year obviously went to an integrated school, he did his best and he got accepted into Harvard University where he is currently going to now. Having girls in his class or school made no difference of how he learned and performed. I think it is a positive experience to have both males and females in classrooms and schools.

    Reply
    1. Desiree N.

      Desiree N.

      Ms. Keeble

      AP English 11

      17 March 2013

      S. Affro’s argument is about whether or not to integrate different sexes in school. Affro claims that students learn better in same sex classes. I do not agree with Affro, I think it makes no difference to go to an integrated school of both boys and girls than to go to a single-sexed school.

      She concludes that since private schools; which are often single-sexed, have a higher percentage of their students going to college, a single- sexed classroom is better. This is a hasty generalization, just because the private schools were not integrated doesn’t mean that that was the reason for the student’s success. Private schools probably have higher trained teachers because private schools have more money than public schools. This evidence has many faults because private schools and public schools are very uncomparable in a lot of ways; money, teaching, classroom size.

      I think it makes no difference to the way you learn if there is a girl sitting next to you or a boy, as long as everyone is working hard, everyone should succeed. For example, a guy I knew who went to Hayward High last year obviously went to an integrated school, he did his best and he got accepted into Harvard University where he is currently going to now. Having girls in his class or school made no difference of how he learned and performed. The only thing that made a difference was how hard he worked.

      I don’t believe that the integration of sexes is a disadvantage, I think it is an advantage because you get interaction with the opposite sex which you wouldn’t be able to do in an all girls school or an all boys school. I think it is a positive experience to have both males and females in classrooms and schools.

      Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.