Single-sex schooling VS Co-ed schooling.

There has been much discussion over the pros and cons of having a single-sex secondary school or a co-ed secondary school. Indeed, there are many differences between these two types of schools, but I agree to a large extent that co-ed secondary schools would provide a fuller educational development rather than single-sex schools.

In my definition, a full educational development consists of not only the academic aspect, but the social aspect as well. What use is there if you excel academically, yet have a lack of social skills? This includes interaction especially with members of the opposite sex. Studying in a co-ed school would allow social skills to be picked up early which could prove to be a helping hand in the working world. Lack of social skills could present major problems later in life.

Yes, relationships would pose a great obstacle to achieving academic results, but look at the other side of the coin. Homosexuals in a co-ed school could almost never happen, next to nil. But in a single-sex school, I am quite certain that you have noticed certain individuals with strange behaviour. In a co-ed school, homosexuality can be heavily prevented because of the mix of males and females.

Also, students in a co-ed school would have an increased level of self-awareness, because of the impression they would want to generate, especially towards students of the opposite gender. This would improve their hygiene and behaviour and would definitely improve the learning environment, which could indirectly improve academic learning. People are more used to people of the same gender, thus may feel “bolder” to do things that they may never think of doing when they are with a member of the opposite gender. This in a co-ed school, with the increased level of self-awareness, chances of students in an unpredictable behaviour would definitely be reduced.

The increased competition to “impress” the opposite sex could also indirectly help academically and physically. Being more self-aware, and wanting to create this impression amongst people, they would want to be better than others academically or physically. Seeing this in a good way, they would study more if they want improved academic results instead of declining due to distractions of boy-girl relationships.

In conclusion, a co-ed school would provide a fuller educational development mainly because of the communication skills that it can be developed, especially between people of opposite genders. Relationships that occur only serve as motivation to improve themselves gradually which indirectly provides academic development, thus fulfilling the educational development which consists of academic results and social skills. Thus I feel that a co-ed school would provide a fuller educational development rather than a single-sex school.

Democracy Creates Stability In A Society

I agree that democracy creates stability in a society to a small extent. By definition, democracy is a government by the people, following the idea of, “rule by majority”. It is a government in which authority is in the hands of its own people, “through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”

Democracy allows the people in a society to have the right to have a say in choosing leaders of their society. A fair and equal chance is given to everyone, thus people would be able to freely vote for the leader whom they think can lead them the best. When people are satisfied that they can vote for whomever they think has the best ability, stability should soon follow because nobody can complain about not having a chance to vote, and depriving them.

Yes, everyone can vote for their own representative to lead, but only one can be chosen out of the many. Thus, there will be disappointment for the people whose leaders were not chosen. This may cause some form of unrest and protest, violent or non-violent, causing some instability in one way or another. Democracy may allow stability for the time being, but when the elections are over, the unsatisfied side of the election may cause some instability, thus democracy does not create stability in a society. And, if the leader whom the majority of the people chose actually has not much ability, or has some form of biasness, it would cause some unrest as well. One example would be in the United States in the 1950s. They claim to be a democratic country, yet the blacks were discriminated and prejudiced against.

There are other forms of governing systems available that could create stability. Communism would be one of them. In theory, there would only be one leader in the nation which has taken up communism. Everyone is considered equal, no matter what you work as, where you live, etc. When it’s payday, that one leader would distribute evenly to the people of the nation. This could create some form of stability because everyone has equal rights and status, giving no reason for revolt within the nation.

In conclusion, a governmental system is needed for a society to create/maintain stability. However, democracy may not be the best system, as seen in the example of the 1950s United States. There are also other systems that could create stability, whether in theory or in practicality. Thus, I agree that democracy creates stability, but to a small extent.

Teenage Drinking.

article taken from: http://kidshealth.org/teen/drug_alcohol/alcohol/alcohol.html

Reviewed by: Steven Dowshen, MD
Date reviewed: November 2006
Originally reviewed by: Eugene Shatz, MD

---

After reading this article on how bad drinking during our teenage years is, I felt really convinced. The article talks about how much alcohol affects our brain and nervous system, which leads to future problems if you start drinking early.

It first starts off explaining to us readers what exactly is alcohol: which is "created when grains, vegetables, or fruits are fermented." It is a natural product, but it causes many side effects that could affect us in the future. One example shown in the article is how much fatter a teenage drinker will be in his adulthood than a teenage nondrinker in his adulthood.

The article then moves on to explaining how it affects us; specifically, our central nervous system. The picture on the right (taken from the article itself), shows how much activity a nondrinker has in his/her brain compared to a drinker's brain.

"Alcohol is a depressant, which means it slows the function of the central nervous system. Alcohol actually blocks some of the messages trying to get to the brain. This alters a person's perceptions, emotions, movement, vision, and hearing."

"More alcohol causes greater changes in the brain, resulting in intoxication."

So why exactly do teenagers drink in the first place, knowing that they are underage, and that it damages their body in many ways? The article explains that some teenagers may drink, due to curiosity, to relieve their stress, or just so that they could fit in with their cliques and friends. It continues to say why we should not drink and use these reasons as excuses.

In my opinion, I agree with the writer of this article. Firstly, drinking is bad for health. It causes many bad side effects, as seen in adults who drink. What more us? The effects that occur in us will definitely be much much more, as it is written in the article, that our brain still develops during our teenage years. Drinking would damage our brain, causing a drop in our grades, and sporting abilit.

Secondly, it is illegal to drink underage. Taking that risk just to satisfy that curiosity of how good drinking is is just not worth it. The punishment would be severe. You may also get addicted to it, and it ruins lives just like drugs do if you get over addicted to it.

And when addiction is just too much for you, your situation just gets worse. Admit that you are in trouble, and seek help immediately. I feel that you should not delay getting this problem solved, as it is very serious. Do not tell yourself that you can control it, as eventually, you know that you can't. Talk to an adult or seek counseling.

Just like smoking and taking drugs, it is something that we must not be tempted to try, or suffer the many consequences that would surface.