高清福利片

When students walked through the sandstone gates of Sydney鈥檚 Newington College for the first day of school last week, they were met by聽.

A group of parents and former students had gathered outside this prestigious school in the city鈥檚 inner west, holding placards decrying the school鈥檚 decision to become fully co-educational by 2033.

Protesters have even聽聽to defend the 160-year-old tradition of boys鈥� education at the school. One聽聽they fear the change is driven by 鈥渨oke [鈥�] palaver鈥� that will disadvantage boys at Newington.

Newington is not the only prestigious boys school to open enrolments to girls. Cranbrook in Sydney鈥檚 east will also go fully co-ed, with the decision sparking a聽.

This debate is not a new one. What is the history behind the single-sex vs co-ed divide? And why does it spark so much emotion?

Schools like Newington were set up at a time when the curriculum and social worlds for upper-class boys and girls were often quite different. Boys and girls were thought to require different forms of education for their intellectual and moral development.

The question of whether it鈥檚 a good idea to educate boys and girls separately has been debated in Australia for at least 160 years, around the time Newington was set up.

In the 1860s, the colony of Victoria introduced a policy of coeducation for all government-run schools. This was despite community concerns about 鈥溾��. There was a concern that boys would be a 鈥渃orrupting influence鈥� on the girls. So schools were often organised to minimise contact between boys and girls even when they shared a classroom.

Other colonies followed suit. The聽聽the various Australian governments decided to educate boys and girls together was financial. It was always cheaper, especially in regional and rural areas, to build one school than two. So most government schools across Australia were established to enrol both girls and boys.

聽was New South Wales, which set up a handful of single-sex public high schools in the 1880s.

These were intended to provide an alternative to single-sex private secondary schools. At that time, education authorities did not believe parents would agree to enrol their children in mixed high schools. Historically, coeducation has been more controversial for older students, but less so for students in their primary years.

By the 1950s, many education experts were arguing聽聽than single-sex schooling. This was at a time of national expansion of secondary schooling in Australia and new psychological theories about adolescents.

In following decades, further debates emerged. A聽聽in the 1980s argued girls were sidelined in co-ed classes. This view was in turn聽, with claims girls were outstripping boys academically and boys were being left behind in co-ed environments.

There is聽聽that one type of schooling (co-ed or single sex) yields better academic outcomes than the other.

Schools are complex and diverse settings. There are too many variables (such as resourcing, organisational structures and teaching styles) to make definitive claims about any one factor. Many debates about single-sex vs co-ed schooling also neglect social class as a聽聽in academic achievement.

Research about the聽聽of co-ed vs single-sex schools is also contested.

厂辞尘别听聽co-ed schooling better prepares young people for the co-ed world they will grow up in.

翱迟丑别谤蝉听聽boys may fare better in co-ed settings, with girls acting as a counterbalance to boys鈥� unruliness. But it has also聽聽boys take up more space and teacher time, detracting from girls鈥� learning and confidence.

Both of these arguments rely on gender stereotypes about girls being compliant and timid and boys being boisterous and disruptive.

Key to these debates is a persistent belief that girls and boys learn differently. These claims聽聽in educational research.

Tradition plays a big part in this debate. Often, parents want their children to have a similar schooling experience to themselves.

For others it鈥檚 about access to specific resources and experiences. Elite boys schools have spent generations accumulating social and physical resources tailored to what they believe boys are interested in and what they believe is in聽. This includes sports facilities, curriculum offerings, approaches to behaviour management and 鈥渙ld boys鈥� networks.

Many of these schools have spent decades marketing themselves as uniquely qualified to educate boys (or a certain type of boy). So it鈥檚 not surprising if some in these school communities are resisting change.

More concerning are the Newington protesters who suggest this move toward inclusivity and gender diversity will make boys 鈥渟econd-class citizens鈥�. This echoes a refrain common in anti-feminist and anti-trans聽, which position men and boys as vulnerable in a world of changing gender norms. This overlooks the ways聽聽from the embrace of greater diversity at school.

As schools do the work to open up to聽, it is likely they will also become welcoming to a wider range of boys and young men.

This article was written by Professor , Dr Kellie Burns and Dr from the University of Sydney. It was originally published in . Hero Image: Sydney Grammar School via Adobe Stock.聽