Jane McCarthy visits a newly co-ed prep school and asks if this is the way forward.

Would you send your child to a co-ed prep school? Or do you prefer the idea of single sex and if so, why? Research has gone on for years to see whether girls and boys learn differently and whether separating the sexes boosts results.

The jury is still out on this, with the Department for Education and Science's last report on gender and education inconclusive about “the impact of single-sex schooling on educational attainment”.

None the less the Independent Association of Prep Schools (IAPS) reports that only 20 per cent of its members are now single-sex: just over 70 boys' prep schools and 30 for girls only, as Barbara Ingram, Director of Education at the IAPS, admits.

She says that schools make changes “for a number of reasons” but clearly market forces must be an important factor. Falling birth rates and the economy inevitably play a part in pupil numbers and influence a school's fortunes.

One school that made the shift is Sandroyd, a much-loved traditional boys' prep school. Set in a 400-acre Dorset deer park, its emphasis on outdoor play, good manners and mutual respect gives it something of an otherworldly air. As one parent explained: “It has a unique charm in its old-fashioned, no-frills approach. It's a place where children can learn to play. My son loved it because he could do all that boys' stuff - conkers and tree-climbing.”

She was one of those who opposed the governors' announcement to go co-ed. Headmaster Martin Harris admits that it has been a battle. “I had to reassure quite a few parents,” he says, “that we would still be a small, caring, family-orientated school. We might look a bit different with a few dresses around the place and netball pitches but essentially nothing would change.”

One reason he cites for some schools failing to integrate girls successfully, is their lack of provision for the newcomers. A balance is needed between too much change and too little. Lorraine Dutfield, the energetic housemistress for the girls' boarding house says,“I run it like a home. We listen to music, paint nails, do prep together, gossip and generally have a lot of fun. I read them a bedtime story, like Mallory Towers, and then tuck them up.” Dormitories are
appropriately named Pippa Funnell, Ellen MacArthur and Kelly Holmes.

Although there were mutterings of discontent among the boys when they first heard that the girls were getting a newly refurbished wing, they have generally been happy to accommodate the new arrivals. “They accept the girls as part of the furniture,” says Lorraine. “With their baggy trousers and scuffed shoes, they make little effort to attract girls and we're not here as a mating place. Friendships, rather than romance, are possible because they live, work and play with each other and there are no pressures.”

Martin Harris says that fears have been allayed and the school now benefits from its female newcomers, “Sandroyd was never a testosterone-driven school; girls are almost a missing part of the jigsaw rather than a bolted-on addition. Having girls here brings huge benefits. They have added a new dimension and it's real life.”

Not so, says American psychologist Leonard Sax, author of the best-selling Why Gender Matters. He disagrees with co-education and says vehemently that our schools “should stop being gender blind” and teach boys and girls separately. He cites scientific evidence to support his belief that hard-wired differences in male and female brains affect every aspect of child development from hearing and eye anatomy to spatial awareness and dexterity. Sax argues that it is therefore unreasonable to try and teach boys and girls the same lessons at the same time in the same way. The early years are an important time to promote and use these differences to advantage.

There are many voices raised in support of these views. The Girls' School Association says that their schools “enable girls to develop confidence in their own abilities as individuals and not define themselves by their gender.”

Without the distraction of the opposite sex and negative peer pressure, so the argument goes, pupils can achieve in a more relaxed and secure environment. They are also less inclined to conform to gender stereotypes with girls being more likely to succeed in subjects such as computer science and physics in girls-only schools and boys in single-sex schools being more likely to achieve in art, music, foreign languages and literature. Parents, then, can hope for no definitive answer from the experts in their quest to decide for or against single-sex education. If you are lucky enough to have the choice in your area, you may well have to resort to good old-fashioned instinct. This is one of those decisions where you may need to be ruled by your heart.