Should girls and boys at the primary school level be separated into different classrooms? For many decades, as far as public schools are concerned, the answer has been no.
The New York Times Magazine recently ran an extensive article on the single-sex education debate.
Boys and girls are fundamentally different and learn better if taught separately, according to proponents of single-sex education. Former physician Leonard Sax studies the neurological differences between boys and girls and is a supporter of the emerging science of sex differences. Other proponents of single-sex education argue that it is critical because boys and girls simply have different social needs.
Jay Giedd, Chief of Brain Imaging at the Child Psychiatry Branch at the NIMH, has a different point of view. He argues that gender is a "crude tool for sorting minds" and points out that the differences between boys and girls (both in terms of brain images and psychological testing) are less significant than the height differences. Giedd's point—and I tend to lean in this direction—is that there might be some merit to dividing classrooms according to learning style, but that dividing along gender lines would still leave too many people in the wrong place. Others weighing in on the issue, such as the ACLU, are concerned that dividing education by gender would automatically create unequal education.
At this point, according to the article, there is not adequate research to prove the benefit or harm of educating boys and girls in separate classrooms. Certainly this issue deserves more study. And maybe that research will finally "prove" what good teachers and schools have always known—that there is no one single answer, no one classroom or school model for everyone; but that there are many learning paths by which each student finds his or her own success.
I teach at a school in OK that has 5th grade separated by gender and it has been a great success. It started off rocky, but it has turned out nicely and I think has been very beneficial.