Single-sex schooling: solution or pseudoscience? Exploring the effects of school type on math self-efficacy in children.

Abstract

Single-Sex Schooling has long been touted as a solution to improving academic and life outcomes for girls in many areas of life – especially confidence in math abilities, math performance in school, and potential vocational interests. Some even propose that it may be a potential area of exploration for addressing the underrepresentation of women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). For a seemingly innocuous construct, the extant literature has been divided into two camps – one which supports single-sex schooling in its positive impacts on girls (particularly relating to pursuing careers in STEM fields and increasing math participation) (such as Pennington & Heim, 2016), and another camp that disagrees with its efficacy. Those who do not support single-sex schooling have even described single-sex schooling as a ‘pseudoscience’ (Halpern et al., 2011) and a ‘problem disguised as a solution’ (Fabes et al., 2015). Thus, this study aims clarify the relationship between school type and math self-efficacy – a construct that is highly discussed and compared across multiple studies (Nguyen & Ryan, 2008; Robinson et al., 2021). I also hope to address the varied findings by addressing the issue of contextual differences in the present literature. I will attempt to do so by examining single-sex schooling in a country that allows for an unbiased examination of it because of its educational landscape. I will do so by discussing the existing literature in 3 parts: (1) A brief introduction to the research on single-sex schooling and math self-efficacy; (2) a review of the perceived impacts of single-sex schooling (including perceived contradictions), and (3) an explanation as to why Singapore presents itself as an ideal location to examine it. Thereafter, I will describe and elucidate the present design and findings of the study.