Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Education Law Blogs -> Edjurist

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Education Law

: Edjurist

I Just Don't See How Single Gender Classes Are A Good Idea

By Justin Bathon

ADVERTISEMENTS

I have been trying to be patient with this growing single-sex classroom idea. I have tried to withhold judgment and see the issue from all sides. I see the articles week after week from around the country touting how it is such a good idea. But, I just can't get on board with it. Now that it has taken hold in a major American city, Boston, I think it is time to start pushing back against this idea.

Now I am as much about improving student achievement as the next person and I realize the demands being placed on school leaders to have their students perform. The awkward glancing between a bespectacled boy and a flirtatious girl wastes time that could otherwise be devoted to imaginary numbers. Girls, not wanting to act smart in front of their "less smart" male counterparts, may not participate as much in class. So, I get it. I see the benefits. But, I don't buy it. Not for a second.

State sponsored segregation, de jure segregation, by gender, a protected class.

What about that sounds good? What about that sounds legal? Seems like we had a little case about schools engaging in de jure segregation round about 50 years ago. Now, I get the opt out provisions ... but don't kid yourself, this is state sponsored segregation at its core. This is saying that this group performs differently than that group, and that they are not equal and they need to be separated. Forget the separate but equal business all the people are touting in association with this plan, separate can never be equal. You can randomize everything (teacher assignments, classrooms used) but it ain't gonna be equal. And equal is not a matter of better or worse, it is a matter of equal. Don't think about it in terms of the girl's class will be better or the boys class will be better, both classes could be no better or no worse than the other, but even if these were somehow miraculously evenly good, they would still not be equal.

Here is the Supreme Court's unanimous language:

"We come then to the question presented: does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does."

"We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment."

About as clear as prescription against state sponsored segregation as you are going to get. To me this segregation by gender is clearly illegal. It is almost spitting in the face of Brown v. Board. But, on top of that, I just plain think this is a horrible idea as an educator. We all know that school is more than about test scores. Well, those awkward glances between boys and girls is partly what school is about. I realize that girls might not be raising their hand as much and I want female students to learn as much as the boys and to grow up and to be corporate CEOs and scientists and everything else. But, you just flat can't separate kids like this. It is inherently unequal.

Update: I knew there were some lawsuits in the works against this, but didn't take the time to research them. Luckily, Western New England Law Professor Erin Buzuvis at Title IX Blog is keeping tabs.

Full post as published by Edjurist on June 12, 2008 (boomark / email).