A Western Sociological Perspective on Co-Education Much has been written both in favor of, and against co-educational institutes

in Pakistan. Both the proponents and opponents cite apparently valid arguments to support their view. But if we look from a Western sociological perspective, co-education has been declared as extremely disadvantageous to the female students. Many feminist movements have started an active campaign to get single-sex schools established in large numbers. So why should co-education be disadvantageous? After all, we have all heard that the school being a miniature form of the society at large, co-education encourages young adults to learn how to interact, much as they would do in the wider society. Co-education also helps, according to its proponents, to inculcate confidence and self-esteem in students as they engage in healthy interaction in classes and extra-curricular activities. Ask these proponents about any moral problems whatsoever. Their answer is that it all depends on you, as an individual, as to how you choose to interact with the opposite sex. But now, if you examine the Western sociologists and what they have discovered through their research, their studies more or less negate the positive aspects of co-education. In fact, the increasing achievement level of female students has been attributed to the increase in single-sex classes. Single-sex classes along with a female teacher, provides a positive role model for the students, not only in traditionally female-dominated subjects like humanities, but also in subjects like science and engineering. The latter subjects, which were traditionally considered as male domains, are now being characterized by increasing female achievement levels. Single-sex classes increase the confidence of female student, according to this interpretation, and results in a more positive attitude to science and technology subjects. Moving on to the study of individual sociologists, the most notable one is that of Michelle Stan worth, who carried out her study Gender and Schooling of ALevel classes. She discovered that interaction in the classroom affected the female students in a very negative way: they got less attention of the teachers, were discouraged from class participation and lacked self-esteem considerably. Her conclusion of girls getting less attention was determined by interviews with teachers. When asked about whom they give the most attention to, the teachers named a male student two and a half times as often as a female student. Most of the teachers felt that it was much more difficult to remember the names of the female students of the class. Discouragement in class participation was determined through the response of the pupils who reported that the male students were four times more likely to join a class discussion, twice as likely to seek help from the teacher and twice as likely to be asked questions. And finally, girls underestimation of their ability was discovered when the pupils were asked to rank themselves in terms of their ability, and teachers were asked to rank their students accordingly. In 19 out of 24 cases in which there was a discrepancy between the two rankings, girls had placed themselves lower than their teachers estimate and all but one boy placed themselves higher than the teachers rank. Another sociologist, Dale Spender has argued in her book Invisible Women that the female students get less attention than male students in the classroom. Spender taped some of the classes she took, in which she tried to divide her time equally between the male and female students. She discovered, however, she only spent 38% of her whole time in interacting with the female students. After a further study, she observed that the female students have to wait for a longer time before they receive any attention from the teacher. Also, the attitude of the male students towards the female student is extremely degrading. She found that the male students tended to insult and abuse the female students. They also had a very dismissive attitude towards them if they took any part in class discussions. Spender concludes that the female students, who come out of such educational systems, tend to be submissive and docile in their later lives, who accept male domination without question. Allison Kellys study Science for Girls was mainly focused on why science subjects were considered as male domains and she discovered that the female students are disadvantaged in the science classes,

which leads them to study arts and humanities instead. In the science classes, she observed, teachers tended to use examples which were more familiar to the male students. The latter also had the tendency to hog the scientific apparatus and shout answers to the questions asked to the class in general. Similarly, Culleys study of computing classes concluded that the male students monopolized the computers and created an uncomfortable environment for the female students. An article by Grenville Phillips entitled Co-education in the Balance looks at an alternative point of view in opposing co-education. It argues that the brains of the males and females develop differently. Certain psychological experiments indicate that the left side of the brain is characterized by rationality, and the right side of the brain is characterized by emotions. In females, there is an intact connection between the left and ride sides of the brain, while in males, the connection is broken. Hence, female students are more productive in the sense that they can pay attention to many aspects of their education simultaneously, while the male students can only concentrate on one aspect at a time. This difference in ability of learning can have an impact in mixed-sex classes. One subject can only be taught in one way, so which way is it going to be? One which works for the female students or one which works for the male students? The above mentioned studies do point towards the fact that mixed-sex classrooms are disadvantaging female students in many ways. Of course the above studies have been heavily criticized as well. But one cannot ignore the fact that if the wider society is characterized by patriarchal relations, such relations tend to reflect themselves in the classroom as well which, as I said in the beginning, is considered as a miniature form of the society as a whole. Can we expect our new generation of female students to be independent and self-assured, if they are a product of such co-educational classrooms/schools? Food for thought.

Is Co-Education a Good Way Out?

Is the co-education arrangement a good idea? Introduction: The ancient Greek philosopher, Plato, said that Co-education creates a feeling of comradeship. He advocated teaching of both the male and female sexes in the same institution without showing any discrimination in imparting education. In recent years, a growing number of parents are choosing to send their children to single sex school. Some parents dont want their children to be in mixed-gender classrooms because at certain ages students of the opposite sex can be a distraction and most important of all entering single sex school means the high academic achievement. Single-sex education is an old approach that is gaining its new momentum now. Contrarily, a case on the point is that, one of my friends, who graduated from a famous girls-only high school, always complains about the weird atmosphere of school and girls eccentric behaviors. There is always a topic hanging over men among the girls, but you will never see a genuine one except for the male teachers. This situation has aroused a strong repercussion among the public. Is single-sex education a cure for low test scores? A panacea for teen pregnancy? A way to cut down on bullying? Or, a return to the dark ages? Should boys and girls be taught separately? Does single-sex education boost academic success? Before weighing the pros and cons of single-sex education, I want to discuss the influences of "nature versus nurture." Many factors affect each child's learning profile and preferences. Some factors relate to the child's nature, such as gender, temperament, abilities, and intelligence. Other influences stem from the way parents and society nurture the child: family upbringing, socioeconomic status, culture and stereotypes all fall under the "nurture" category. So whenever girls and boys are together, their behavior inevitably reflects the larger society in which they live. If you were in the single sex school, it means that the girls or boys

Against of Co-educations
The system of co-education is not good in the Islamic States of the world. This system has been produced by the non-Muslims states. The concept of Hijab is not there, but in religion Islam clear order of Hijab (parda) is presented in the Holy Quran in surah Nisa. Meeting, talks, relations and other nonIslamic tasks between the males and females (Muslim na-mahram) is prohibited in Islam. A famous Hadith, " when a na-mahram man and woman are standing alone, the third one is evil (Ebleese) amongst them". In the co-educationing institutions certainly universities a large number of males, females students are sitting in shape of pairs and wasting their precious time in kidding with one another. In Europe the sexual intercourse between male, female is no matter but it is prohibited here. If they do this practice there no mention. But in Islam there is no place for such practice except their legal wives. This system produces many social evils in the society, which causes unbearable situations for the Muslim society which is not possible to adopt the Muslims. We should also take into consideration the fact that our youths are more likely to misuse to the opportunity of free mixing than to use properly. Everyone know that the aims of education is different from each other is completely different from west. In Islamic society both the sexes do not adopt same careers in life due to physical structure of sexes. I have also studied in the environment of co-education. I am too the production of this particular system. It is false belief that with giving co-education to save some money. Finally I will say demerits are more than merits in our society. Thanks Disadvantage of Co-education here are certain disadvantages of co-education. First, co-education is against the law of nature. Girls and boys are temperamentally different from each other. They have different duties to perform. A girl is required to receive education which can make her a good wife and a good mother. While a boy is required to receive education which can make him a good husband and a good father. A Uniform education can not help them be expert in their respective fields. Thus the very idea of coeducation is wrong. Then co-education is against our traditions. It will develop immoral relations between boys and girls. Young boys and girls may fall a victim to their emotions. The story of the young generation in the advanced countries is pitiable. Moreover our religion Islam disallows free mixing of boys and girls. Also, some subjects cannot be taught in the presence of both sexes. Again, in developing countries like Pakistan, it is not an economical measure. In our country, colleges are few. These are already over-crowded. Co-education can prove economical only in the countries where the numbers of students in colleges are very small. So we should adopt this system with great care According to me co education is not bad...in fact it creates confidence in boys n girls particularly in girls. But if we think about our religion ISLAM so in our religion everything has its logic n concept. Nothing is meaningless in ISLAM. So if ISLAM is not allowing us to have coeducation so there must be any deep reason inside that. Now a days students are not getting their education for themselves, they are getting their education because of coeducation, and this poor mentality of students is creating so many problems in our society and a great tension for their parents also. So we should avoid coeducation as it is not much difficult for us... According to me coeducation is not good in our country. Because our country is a hot country. Coeducation should only be implementing till primary. 1st the concept of coeducation was introduced in Switzerland and the it come in different Western countries like Russia, Australia, Italy, France and United State America. But it is sad that it is being popular in Pakistan more than other Western countries.

Some persons say Pakistan is in poverty. It is only there sayings and nothing. They are poor Pakistan is not... Mashaallah there are everything available in our beloved country Pakistan Great Answer Not Helpful Report

Are The Disadvantages Of Co-Education In Pakistan?

There are definite disadvantages of co-education. First, co-education is against the law of natural history. Girls and boys are temperamentally unusual from each other. They have different duties to perform. A girl is necessary to receive education which can make her a good wife and a good mother. While a boy is required to receive education which can make him a good husband and a good father. A homogeneous education cannot help them be expert in their personal fields. Thus the very idea of co-education is wrong. Then co-education is against our society. It will develop distort relations between boys and girls. Young boys and girls may fall a victim to their emotions. The story of the young age band in the advanced countries is pitiable. Moreover our religion Islam disallows free mixing of boys and girls. Also, some subjects cannot be taught in the presence of both sexes. Again, in developing countries like Pakistan, it is not an economical measure. In our country, colleges are few. These are already overcrowded. Co-education can prove economical only in the countries where the numbers of students in colleges are very small. So we should adopt this system with great care

The main problems are: There is no co-education in majority schools which make both male & female uneasy with each other. Also those guys who never remained in any co-education usually go for making sexual relationship with girls by being flirty (as compared to those who studied in co-education since child hood) & those girls who are new to co-education usually falls for guys flirt more easily as compared to those who studied with boys since child hood (as they know such flirty nature of south Asian men more). So all this makes co-education a lovers point coz of majority having no co-education experience. This all makes parents'(especially of girls) ALREADY STRICT attitude even stricter towards co-education. According to my opinion the co education system is not bad because we get advantage about this .some time in universities the boys can easily understand which is so much important but girls cannot do? so the education level is high when they exchange their opinion to each other .in other side our young people have positive thinking and take advantage about this that good 4 us.

Education is important, above all, because it empowers people to take more control of their
lives. At a personal level, it provides people with self-confidence needed to make their opinions heard. At a community level, it provides the skills through which people can protect their rights--to land, to schools, or to

participation in public life. At a national level, it creates a demand to be heard. Without education, democracy is an empty shell. There are some other commitments reconfirmed by the government at EFA-SAARC meeting, which requires revolutionary changes in policymaking to implement and achieve them. Elimination of gender disparity is one of the big challenges in this regard, which may never be achieved without introducing a co-education system from primary to tertiary levels. This task is politically difficult, as there is a chance of resistance from politico-religious circles of the country, who, at the moment, are very much engaged in decision-making. Ministers for education of SAARC countries, through a ministerial meeting held last month in Islamabad have advised the governments to allocate progressively a minimum of 4% of GDP to education. This, too, seems very difficult and an almost impossible task in near future because 4% of the GDP means that education needs approximately Rs170bn annually, and that ample amount, which is more than our total defense budget (160bn for the year 2003-4), would never be earmarked. Under the camouflage of 'national interest', invisible economic managers are not going to cut down defense allocations to meet this demand. A meager amount of Rs3.1bn has been allocated for the development of education sector in this year's budget, compared to previous year's allocations of Rs2.7bn. According to the latest economic survey, in the year 1995-96 the total allocations for education sector were equivalent to 2% of the GDP. In the year 1996-97, they were raised to 2.62 %, but when the military government took over in 1999, these allocations were reduced to 1.6% for the year 2000-01, and were slightly increased to 1.7% of the GDP for the fiscal year 2003-04. The education sector is facing a huge gap between rural and urban areas as well, similar to the rest of the social sector components. In every program, which aims to bring reforms and to increase overall literacy rates, policymakers give priority to urban development in terms of allocations and projects. As a result, in the year 2003, the estimated rural literacy (40.91%) is less than that of urban literacy (68.74%). Although the UNESCO Pakistan report reveals that growth rate for female literacy has nearly doubled, still the gap between the two genders is very huge. Estimated figures for 2003 show that female literacy rate is 38.57%, while male literacy rate is 61.93%. If we compare female literacy rates of urban and rural areas, the gap is still larger--61.89% urban literate women and only 27.06% rural literate women. Another evidence of the increasing divide between rural and urban development is that of 21 districts where literacy is very low. Only two of these districts are urban-based. Gujarat and Jhelum had their status changed due to very high literacy. There is a need to further explore such success stories and what factors lie behind such rapid achievements through research and analysis, and replicated in areas where there is low or very low levels of literacy. Policymakers and planners have been emphasizing on investments in higher literacy education, instead of primary education, to achieve set target. Low levels of investment in basic and primary education, successive failures of promises made in every plan, and the practice of missing well-marked deadlines, have created a credibility gap. Information technology education--which is more or less a completely urban-based education--is enjoying a larger chunk of the budgetary allocations as compared to formal education sector. Planners are unable to understand the reality that increasing monetary allocations to formal and informal education, with special focus to the rural sector, will only lead to an increased growth rate of literacy. This year's announced Public Sector Development Program (PSDP) is also an evidence that higher education and money-oriented IT sector has been given much importance than the people-oriented formal education sector. PSDP figures show that higher education sector, including IT sector, has been allocated Rs6.5bn, while the formal education sector is left to pick up the crumbs, with Rs3.1bn. It is being claimed that the formal education sector allocations rose from Rs5.5bn in 200203 to Rs7.5bn in 2003-04, which translates to a ratio of merely 4.7% of the total allocations for development sector. Rural literate candidates who are competing for jobs in public and private sectors, for admissions in standard educational institutions that are again situated in urban areas, find it impossible to survive due to the fact that the rural areas are facing deprivation in every social sector. The only system that saves them from complete isolation is the quota allocation, which prevails in public sector jobs and in educational institutions; yet it, too, is arguably unjust