Value in Single-Sex Schools

To the editors:

As a successful graduate of an all-girl's school, I would disagree with Andrew Chang's assessment of single-sex education (Column, May 10).

While Change asserts that single-sex education "failed to prepare [him] for the world beyond," I would argue that, in many cases, such schooling provides the best preparation of all--the opportunity to develop as a mature, confident and assertive individual during pivotal years in one's development. This system is successful particularly for girls in middle and high school, a period when sexual tension first emerges and can become an obstacle to one's educational pursuits. This is especially true in subjects like math and science, where boys often dominate mixed-sex environments. If it weren't for my years at an all-girl's school, I doubt I would have developed so strong a preference for these fields nor such personal confidence in my abilities to work successfully in these subjects.

That's not to say single-sex education does not have it's drawbacks, notably the eventual period of readjustment to a mixed-sex environment. But I would argue that such pitfalls can be overcome, both with the "highly awkward social functions" mentioned by Chang and by integration later in life--interaction that is enhanced by the confidence and self-respect gained beforehand. The "self-esteem boost" provided by the single-sex environment is not a short-term benefit, as suggested by Chang. Rather, such self-assurance gained early in life can become a vibrant force for years to come, and, I believe, will remain a vital component of personality throughout life. As a result, I am both happy with and extremely grateful for my years at an all-girls high school. MARISA L. PORGES '00   May 11, 1999