Gender-segregated (GS) schooling has become popular in the United States despite the fact that every major review has concluded that GS schooling is not superior to coeducational schooling. Moreover, concern has been raised that GS schooling leads to negative effects, including increased gender stereotyping. We argue that these negative effects result from peer influences in gender-segregated peer contexts—including GS schooling. We also contend that educational policy makers need to understand these peer effects so that better decisions can be made about how children are grouped in classrooms and to create coeducational programs that promote tolerance and acceptance between girls and boys.
AmmermuellerA.PischkeJ. R.Ä. (2009). Peer effects in European primary schools: Evidence from the progress in international reading literacy study. Journal of Labor Economics, 27, 315-348. doi:10.1086/603650
BiglerR. S.LibenL. S. (2006). A developmental intergroup theory of social stereotypes and prejudice. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 34, 39-89. doi:10.1016/S0065-2407(06)80004-2
5.
BrechwaldW. A.PrinsteinM. J. (2011). Beyond homophily: A decade of advances in understanding peer influence processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 166-179. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00721.x
6.
BrownR.HewstoneH. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 255-343). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
7.
CarrellS.FullertonR.WestJ. (2009). Does your cohort matter? Measuring peer effects in college achievement. Journal of Labor Economics, 27, 439-464. doi:10.1086/600143
8.
ChangL. (2004). The role of classroom norms in contextualizing the relations of children’s social behaviors to peer acceptance. Developmental Psychology, 40, 691-702. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.691
DodgeK. A.DishionT. J.LansfordJ. E. (2006). Deviant peer influences in intervention and public policy for youth. SRCD Social Policy Report, 20, 3-19.
11.
FabesR. A.HanishL. D.MartinC. L.ReesingA.MossA. (2012). The effects of young children’s affiliations with prosocial peers on subsequent emotionality in social interactions. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30, 569-585.doi:10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02073.x
12.
FabesR. A.HanishL. DMartinC. L.PahlkeE. (2013). Gender segregated schooling and gender stereotyping. Educational Studies. Advance online publication. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03055698.2012.760442. doi:10.1080/03055698.2012.760442
13.
FabesR. A.MartinC. L.HanishL. D.AndersM. C.Madden-DerdichD. A. (2003). Early school competence: The roles of sex-segregated play and effortful control. Developmental Psychology, 39, 848-858. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.5.848
14.
FarisR.FelmleeD. (2011). Network centrality and gender segregation in same- and cross-gender aggression. American Sociological Review, 76, 48-73. doi:10.1177/0003122410396196
15.
GalliganK. M.FabesR. A.MartinC. L.HanishL. D. (2011, April). Gender differences in young children’s play qualities in gender-segregated and gender-integrated peer interactions. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
16.
GurianM.HenleyP.TruemanT. (2001). Boys and girls learn differently!: A guide for teachers and parents. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
17.
HalpernD. F.EliotL.BiglerR. S.FabesR. A.HanishL. D.HydeJ.MartinC. L. (2011). The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 333, 1706-1707. doi:10.1126/science.1205031
18.
HalpernD. F.EliotL.BiglerR. S.FabesR. A.HanishL. D.HydeJ.MartinC. L. (2012). Response: The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 335, 166-168. doi:10.1126/science.335.6065.166-c
19.
HanushekE. A.KainJ. F.MarkmanJ. M.RivkinS. G. (2003). Does peer ability affect student achievement?Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18, 527-544. doi:10.1002/jae.741
20.
HayesA.PahlkeE.BiglerR. S. (2011). The efficacy of single-sex education: Testing for selection and peer quality effects. Sex Roles, 65, 693-703. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9903-2
21.
HilliardL. J.LibenL. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms: Effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup bias. Child Development, 81, 1787-1798. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01510.x
22.
HodsonG. (2011). Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 154-159. doi:10.1177/0963721411409025
23.
JacksonC. K. (2012). Single-sex schools, student achievement, and course selection: Evidence from rule-based student assignments in Trinidad and Tobago. Journal of Public Economics, 96, 173-187. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.09.002
24.
JusticeL. M.PetscherY.SchatschneiderC.MashburnA. (2011). Peer effects in preschool classrooms: Is children’s language growth associated with their classmates’ skills?Child Development, 82, 1768-1777. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01665.x
25.
KaferK. (2007). Taking the boy crisis in education seriously: How school choice can boost achievement among boys and girls (Position Paper No. 604). Washington, DC: Independent Women’s Forum. Retrieved from http://www.iwf.org/files/49ba4dcb1f95dacf6d20aa721e429c88.pdf.
KellamS. G.LingX.MeriscaR.BrownC. H.IalongoN. (1998). The effect of the level of aggression in the first grade classroom on the course and malleability of aggressive behavior into middle school. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 165-185. doi:null
28.
KesselsU.HannoverB. (2008). When being a girl matters less: Accessibility of gender-related self-knowledge in single-sex and coeducational classes and its impact on students’ physics-related self-concept of ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 273-289. doi:10.1348/000709907X215938
29.
KindermannT. A. (2007). Effects of naturally existing peer groups on changes in academic engagement in a cohort of sixth graders. Child Development, 78, 1186-1203. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01060.x
30.
KindermannT. A.SkinnerE. A. (2009). How do naturally existing peer groups shape children’s academic development during sixth grade?European Journal of Developmental Science, 3, 27-38. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01060.x
31.
KleinS. (2011). The risks of sex-segregated public education for girls, boys, and everyone. In MartinJ. L. (Ed.), Women as leaders in education: Succeeding despite inequity, discrimination, and other challenges (Vol. 2, pp. 155-194). Westport, CT: Praeger.
LeaperC. (Ed.). (1994). Childhood gender segregation: Causes and consequences (Vol. 65). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
34.
LeeV. E.MarksH. M.ByrdT. (1994). Sexism in single-sex and educational independent secondary school classrooms. Sociology of Education, 67, 92-120. doi:10.2307/2112699
35.
LockheedM. E. (1986). Reshaping the social order: The case of gender segregation. Sex Roles, 14, 617-628. doi:10.1007/BF00287692
36.
MaccobyE. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
37.
MarshH. W. (1989). Effects of single-sex and coeducational schools: A response to lee and bryk. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 651-653. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.4.651
38.
MartinC. L. (2000). Cognitive theories of gender development. In EckesT.TrautnerH. M (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender. (pp. 91-121). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
MartinC. L.FabesR. A. (2001). The stability and consequences of young children’s same-sex peer interactions. Developmental Psychology, 37, 431-446. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.37.3.431
40.
MartinC. L.FabesR. A.EvansS. M.WymanH. (1999). Social cognition on the playground: Children’s beliefs about playing with girls versus boys and their relations to sex segregated play. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 751-771. doi:10.1177/0265407599166005
41.
MartinC. L.FabesR. A.HanishL. D.LeonardS.DinellaL. M. (2011). Experienced and expected similarity to same-gender peers: Moving toward a comprehensive model of gender segregation. Sex Roles, 65, 421-434. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0029-y
42.
MartinC. L.FabesR. A.HanishL.UpdegraffK.MillerC.GaertnerB.FosterS. (April, 2012). The Sanford Harmony Program: Program description and preliminary findings. Invited address presented at the Gender Development Research Conference, San Francisco, CA.
43.
MartinC. L.HalversonC. (1981). A schematic processing model of sex typing and stereotyping in children. Child Development, 52, 1119-1134. doi:10.2307/1129498.
44.
MartinC. L.KornienkoO.SchaeferD. R.HanishL. D.FabesR. A.GobleP. (2013), The role of sex of peers and gender-typed activities in young children’s peer affiliative networks: A longitudinal analysis of selection and influence. Child Development, 84, 921-937. doi:10.1111/cdev.12032
45.
MashburnA. J.JusticeL. M.DownerJ. T.PiantaR. C. (2009). Peer effects on children’s language achievement during pre-kindergarten. Child Development, 80, 686-702. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01291.x
46.
MehtaC. M.StroughJ. (2009). Sex segregation in friendships and normative contexts across the life span. Developmental Review, 29, 201-220. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2009.06.001
47.
MehtaC. M.StroughJ. (2010). Gender segregation and gender-typing in adolescence. Sex Roles, 63, 251-263. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9780-8
48.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751-783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
RubleD. N.MartinC. L.BerenbaumS. (2006). Gender development. In DamonW. (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 858-932). New York, NY: Wiley.
52.
SantosC.GalliganK.PahlkeE.FabesR. (in press). Gender-typed behaviors, achievement and adjustment among racially and ethnically diverse boys during early adolescence. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83, 252-264.
53.
SaxL. (2005). Why gender matters: What parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York, NY: Doubleday.
54.
SchaeferD. R.LightJ. M.FabesR. A.HanishL. D.MartinC. L. (2010). Fundamental principles of network formation among preschool children. Social Networks, 32, 61-71. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2009.04.003
55.
SignorellaM. L.FriezeI. H.HersheyS. W. (1996). Single-sex versus mixed-sex classes and gender schemata in children and adolescents: A longitudinal comparison. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 599-607. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00325.x
56.
TrogdonJ. G.NonnemakerJ.PaisJ. (2008). Peer effects in adolescent overweight. Journal of Health Economics, 27, 1388-1399. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2008.05.003
57.
WadeJ. C.OkesolaO. (2002). Racial peer group selection in African-American high school students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 30, 96-109.
58.
ZozakiewiczC.RodriguezA. J. (2007). Using sociotransformative constructivism to create multicultural and gender-inclusive classrooms. Educational Policy, 21, 397-425. doi:10.1177/0895904806290126
