Is Co-ed Education Beneficial Or Is It A Draw- Back?

In a recent article entitled, "Teaching Boys and Girls Seperately", the question of the whether public schools at all levels should start offering single sex education facilities. In particular the article focuses on a small school in Foley, Alabama, called Foley Intermediate School. By the authors descriptions of the seperate learning environments for boys and girls, the classrooms seem to be benefitting the girls who have a more comfortable settings of bright colored walls, warmer room temperatures, etc. The boys classrooms on the other hand are darker colored, their room temperature seems to be a little lower than the girls rooms, and it seems that the school is focusing on all the wrong aspects of education. The chief argument for the seperation of sexes comes from the schoools principle, Lee Mansell who said she was inspired to make such a drastic change to the school after reading the book, "Boys and Girls Learn Differently!" by Michael Gurian. After reading the book and a few assorted articles on the topic, Mansell developed the plan to help the "low scoring students" (who in this school were minority boys), and began seperating in 2004. Apparently after making her school faculty read the articles and studies, and book that she had, a full scall overhaul of the school took place to better suite the failing or sub-par population of students in it. Additionally, enough parents were impressed that when Foley Intermediate, a school of 322 fourth and fifth graders, reopened in 2004 after summer recess, the school had four single-sex classrooms.
After reading the article I find it interesting that a whole school make up was changed based on a few well-written articles, and studies that were done on Japanese children, not American, and one good book. Yes children learn differently, but there are things that can't be taught in a seperated atmosphere. Social skills and developing control for students male or female all take place and really come into their own during middle school and high school years. I believe that although handling students weaknesses is a good reason for the change, it is not a good enough reason to deprive developing children from experiencing how to communicate and interact with the opposite sex.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/magazine/02sex3-t.html?_r=1&ref=education&oref=slogin>