Oct 24


Separate is not equal

by Terry 24 October 2006


The US Department of Education has just thrown us back to the 50s.  Effective November 24, school districts will be able to segregate classes, or even entire schools, by sex, and they’re doing it under the guise of promoting better education and discipline.

“Some students may learn better in single-sex education environments,” said Education Secretary Margaret Spellings. “These final regulations permit communities to establish single-sex schools and classes as another means of meeting the needs of students.”

“Every child should receive a high quality education in America and every school and district deserves the tools to provide it,” she said.

Under the new regulations, classes could be offered to one sex only without a requirement that it be taught for the other.  All they would have to do is provide a co-ed version of the class somewhere.  In the case of completely separate schools, a co-ed option must be available.  That works against the notion of promoting neighborhood schools, requiring some students to travel to attend a school free from bias.

NOW and the ACLU have already spoken out against this proposal.

The problem with the single-sex classrooms, as I see it, is that it’s creating an artificial environment that encourages the idea that girls cannot compete with boys and tells boys that girls don’t belong in their sphere.  After all the ways we’ve tried to level the playing field in the last 50 years, this is a huge step backwards.  If segregation benefits some, perhaps the lesson that should be taken away from that is that more stereotypes need to be torn down rather than institutionalized.  This plan is the lazy way out.

Via the Seattle PI.

Tagged:

5 Responses to “Separate is not equal”

  1. *** Dave on October 25th, 2006 11:30 pm

    My understanding is that such school settings are not to get those “underachieving girls” out of class with the big boys, but rather to get boys in a class where they’re not being outperformed by girls. There’s certainly some research that seems to indicate that, for some kids, single-sex settings are better for learning — not as a pandering to stereotypes, but a recognition of either biological or deeply socialized differences between the genders.

    That said, it still worries me, since it’s something that *could* be easily overused, if not abused.

  2. T.G. Scott on October 26th, 2006 11:01 am

    Terry, I’m not totally against separating the sexes in school. I think I could have performed better without some of the crude acting boys distracting me, or worse, feeling me up in the hallway. Our school district recently put kids in school uniforms. I think it cuts down on distraction when everybody pretty much looks alike. I wish they had done that too when I was in school.

  3. Terry on October 26th, 2006 2:49 pm

    I see your point, Dave, and share your concerns. I think it makes a lot of assumptions that aren’t necessarily true, ie that all girls are the same, or that all boys learn in the same manner. All kids should have their learning needs met as individuals, not as representatives of their gender.

  4. Terry on October 26th, 2006 2:52 pm

    Tammy, I think if you’ve got groping in the hallways and acting out in class, there’s bigger things at work than different learning styles. It’s an issue of human respect that I don’t think segregation will fix.

  5. T.G. Scott on October 27th, 2006 11:06 am

    That’s why I got a black belt. However, from what I hear today, high school is still more dramatic that As the World Turns if you listen to the teens I do. I think they could use a lot less drama and more concentration.

Leave a Reply