Single-Sex Classes Rooted in Stereotypes Prevalent Across the Nation, Says ACLU Report

[redqueen]

http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/single-sex-classes-rooted-stereotypes-prevalent-across-nation-says-aclu-report

Findings Gathered As Part of “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” Campaign


NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union released a preliminary report today that finds that single-sex education programs in public schools across the country overwhelmingly and unlawfully base their programs on discredited science rooted in sex stereotypes and don’t offer parents any reasonable alternative.

The report’s findings were gathered as part of the “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” campaign in fifteen states to investigate programs that force students into a single-sex environment and deprive both boys and girls of equal educational opportunities. Although documents continue to be collected, the ACLU released the preliminary report because its first findings show that sex-stereotyped instruction is widespread.

“Too many of these programs are based on sweeping and unfounded generalizations that assume that all girls learn one way and all boys learn a different way,” said Amy L. Katz, cooperating attorney with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. “All meaningful studies of these programs show that they don’t improve academics, but they do foster stereotypes and do a disservice to kids who don’t fit these artificial distinctions.”

...

This stuff is laughable.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/08/sex-segregation-schools-aclu

Is Putting Boys and Girls in Separate Classrooms Legal?

...

The Van Devender suit is one of several that have cropped up against school districts mandating gender-differentiated education. Late last year, the ACLU shut down single-sex ed in the Vermilion Parish school district in Louisiana; it also unsuccessfully sued a sex-segregated school in Kentucky. More cases are likely. Since the Department of Education eased federal restrictions for single-sex programs in 2006, hundreds have materialized around the country. ACLU offices in Alabama, Florida, Maine, Mississippi, Virginia, and West Virginia have sent cease-and-desist letters to school districts, warning them that their single-sex programs may be illegal.

Most of these schools, including Van Devender, base their curricula (PDF) on the teachings of Leonard Sax, the founder and director of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education (NASSPE), and the father of sex-based teaching methods. His materials—which include three books—have been broadly discredited by academics.

...

One Sax article (PDF) that Van Devender used in crafting the program explains that boys' teachers should "speak loudly and in short, direct sentences with clear instructions: 'Put down your papers. Open your books. Let's get to work!'" Girls' teachers should "speak much more softly, using more first names with more terms of endearment and fewer direct commands: 'Lisa, sweetie, it's time to open your book. Emily, darling, would you please sit down for me and join us for this exercise?'"

Another article used by Van Devender suggests that boys will get excited about math if teachers focus "on the properties of the numbers per se." Girls, though, need "real world" examples when learning math, so when presenting a formula, "don't expect the girls to ooh and aah over that fact the way the boys do."

...

Well, the claims are laughable.

The fact that these programs are being started all over the country is kinda scary. The push to portray these stereotypes as innate differences between the sexes ... what decade is this again?

[seabeyond]

1. i heard recent study on npr that same sex class shows sexism taught to the boys

i would never allow an all one gender upbringing for my boys. it is vital that they learn how to be in a world with both gender. if i allowed my boys in a boy class, they would have all kinds of problems. they do not learn in the way they are told they are suppose to because they are boys. they do not excel where they are told boys are suppose to excel. and they excel where boys are told they do not excel.

i see so many benefits with the boys having girls in their class. so many advantages. i see none with an all boy class.

what i saw as my kids went thru the system is a reinforcement from the parent that boys were incapable all over the place. that school was too rough for them. that they should not have so many expectations. that the women teachers didnt understand. middle school the boys worked hard to show their stupid. my boys were having a tough time because they refused to adopt that boys are stupid, boys do not like school, bullshit. that was not allowed in our house either.

what happened in my house, is i had very high expectation of my boys, did not ever allow excuses, and when a problem arose, they had to figure out solutions cause it is not the teachers future, it is theirs. so they had better damn well figure out how to get along and make it work. and i would support the solutions they came up with.

reading. i have talked often, how books were a huge part of kids time when they were very little. reading time was every night. wanted that extra half hour to hour to stay awake? read a book. and they did. they love their reading and it is a part of their entertainment even as teens. both excel. both have been the top in the class in all english and history courses.

this is only reinforcing the societal conditioned stereotypes that hinders and restricts all of who we are.

simply, i would not allow it. and it would have been very bad for my boys.

[redqueen]

2. Sometimes it might make sense...

say in gym class, for example. But the justification for segregating the class has to be based on valid research, not silly stereotypes.

And they sure can't have different rules defining acceptable limits for behavior based on sex.

[seabeyond]

3. i am talking academics. middle school, pull out for the sex ed class, i get that.

but, i am talking academics here.

[redqueen]

8. Yeah, it seems like most research supports the same.

The summary of the various research from the Scottish government.

- There are criticisms of the practice of using girls to 'police' boys' behaviour in mixed gender classes.

- Single gender groupings used flexibly can have a potential positive impact, with benefits for both boys and girls.

- There is a case for using single gender groups in sensitive subjects and for particular aspects of the curriculum, for example, in health education or in personal and social education where sex education is a theme.

- Preparation should include discussions about the rationale for single gender classes with all stakeholders.

- Staff commitment to changes in organisational strategies is critical.

- There is a possibility of increasing 'laddish' behaviour in some boy-only settings.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/05/03105933/8

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. The ACLU is wrong about this.

http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/03/17/lots-of-news-on-boys-none-of-it-good/

Boys are failing, and girls are not reaching their full potential because of the way education is designed.

Knowing this, and refusing to change, means that this kind of failure is a social goal.

"Establishing sterotyped attitudes" is both impossible to measure and counterindicated by the actual results. Those stereotypes are in fact reinforced by coed classrooms.

Cambridge university studied the results of single gender classroom and the author found the results "astonishing".

Within the area of whole school approaches, we have focused on single-sex classes as a
mode of organization in co-educational schools. There is emerging evidence, despite the
reservations of those who feel that comprehensive schools should be co-educational in all
respects, that many girls and boys feel more at ease in such classes, feel more able to
interact with learning and to show real interest without inhibition, and often achieve more
highly as a result.
As with other intervention strategies, however, there is the need for some caution in any
analysis. Such single-sex classes are not a panacea in themselves; in some schools, boys’-
only classes have become very challenging to teach, or stereotyping of expectation has
established a macho regime which has alienated some boys. Even in the most successful
schools, both boys and girls have consistently said that they do not want to be in single-sex
classes for all lessons.
Evidence in favour of the development of single-sex classes for some subjects, from both
students’ voices and from an analysis of levels of academic achievement, is nonetheless
persuasive. Again it has been possible, through an examination of good practice, to
identify a series of pre-conditions for successful implementation. These include:
􀂃 The use of a proactive and assertive approach in the classroom, which avoids the
negative or confrontational, conveys high expectations and a sense of challenge,
and uses praise regularly and consistently.
􀂃 The development of a team ethic, to establish a class identity, supported by humour
and informality on the part of both teachers and students, to identify with their
interests and enthusiasms, but without reinforcing stereotypes.
􀂃 Senior managers who give high profile and active support to single-sex classes, and
see them as a central plank within the achievement ethos of the school, rather than
simply allowing them as an ‘experiment’ which might succeed or fail.
􀂃 Promoting the intervention actively to governors, parents and carers, and all staff,
so that single-sex classes can be promoted and sustained through time.
Where these pedagogic and organizational pre-conditions have been in place, in selective
but carefully targeted subjects for specific students, there has been a positive effect on
achievement, particularly in relation to boys’ performances in modern languages and
English and girls’ performances in sciences and mathematics.

https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/RR636

(jury: the above text is understood to be public domain)

[redqueen]

6. A social goal? People have been wringing their hands over this for a long time.

Do you have a link to the Cambridge University study? The link you gave says the material is archived. I'm curious about examples of which and how many of the "some subjects" not specified in your excerpt have been shown to have a significant enough difference in sex-segregated classes.

I did find this from Scotland, which references the same material. Haven't read it all yet but it seems very balanced.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/05/03105933/8


And then of course there's this:

(We did not discuss the impact of video games on boys and reading, but a new study suggests that school performance suffers because of the time boys spend playing video games.)

That's from the first link, the piece from the AJC.

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. The button on the left labeled free download is the link to pdf

But here's the link.

http://goo.gl/pk8yp

I had to use a shortener to make it work.

Wringing one's hands while suing the only people trying to fix it is unproductive. If policymakers know that a policy is failing, yet refuse to solve it, then failure is policy.

[redqueen]

19. " suing the only people trying to fix it"

You think schools using the methods advocated by a discredited crackpot are trying to fix it? Really? Cause that's who they're suing. Schools which are implementing idiotic methods, illegally.

I'm on my phone and not planning on getting online to download anything. Which "some" subjects did they find significant improvement in?

Also I noticed your lack of concern for the study that didn't push this agenda. The one that pointed to excessive video game use as a possible culprit, and not da eebul wimminz.

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. The results of the existing system shows where discredit is due.

It is failing students, but since it's failing male students to a greater degree than female ones, everything seems okay.

You asked for the link. Whether you choose to read it is your call.

[redqueen]

21. LOL, you haven't read it, but you expect me to.

Right.

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. My suggestion that you read about the subject of your op does not imply that I have not. n/t

[redqueen]

27. No, it's your obstinate refusal to list the "some" (not "many") subjects

which betrays your lack of familiarity with the material referenced.

The subject of this OP is not the few areas where sex-segregated classes have been shown in non-discredited studies to make a positive difference. The subject is lawsuits to fight the illegal nutbaggery described in the same.

Please do feel free to start another OP about the few classes where it does make a difference. In GD maybe, or Education.

[MadrasT]

5. Good. I'm glad there is pushback.

“Too many of these programs are based on sweeping and unfounded generalizations that assume that all girls learn one way and all boys learn a different way,” said Amy L. Katz, cooperating attorney with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. “All meaningful studies of these programs show that they don’t improve academics, but they do foster stereotypes and do a disservice to kids who don’t fit these artificial distinctions.”

And if a teacher talked to me like this:

'Lisa, sweetie, it's time to open your book. Emily, darling, would you please sit down for me and join us for this exercise?'

I would react very, very badly. I don't want to be treated like a gentle flower because of my gender. Ick. And what happens when you get into the real world? Suddenly you're confronted with loud, demanding (frequently male) bosses who are not going to "sweetie" and "darling" you. (Hell, they could get sued for that!)

I am concerned about the problems we are seeing with boys falling behind in school and attending/graduating college at a lower rate, but same sex classroom is NOT the way to fix it (IMO). That's like putting out a match with a firehose, and introduces more problems than it solves.

There have to be other ways that are less drastic than gender segregation. Maybe testing children to determine what learning style works for them, and putting children into groups where teaching methodology is based on their best learning style?

Nope. I don't want sexism starting in kindergarden and continuing through the next 13 years, thank you.

[seabeyond]

7. what would be interesting is to see if more kids overall going to college

and if the boy rate is staying about what it always is, just the girl rate is increasing seeing the need to go to college where as fewer in the past did.

that would not be an indictment to less boys because there are more girls. that would be more girls going and the trend of boys where it always is.

do you get what i am saying?

in the past it was less promoted for a girl to go to college cause was going to get married and raise kids. now there is an incentive for girls to go to college, and a push.

boys have always expected to be the provider. so the base with the boys that tend to go to college should be established.

that would have nothing to do with there being an issue with boys.

[MadrasT]

9. Yes, I am also curious about the nature of the statistics.

Also... back when more boys were going to college than girls (or even later when it was more equal), and when there wasn't such a disparity in how boys performed in school vs how girls did... there were mostly MIXED GENDER CLASSROOMS.

If boys performed OK in MIXED GENDER CLASSROOMS, oh heck, say back in my day in the 70s/80s... how does it make any sense to assume that mixed gender classrooms are the problem now?

There is a problem I think, but this same-sex education nonsense isn't the answer...

Mixed-gender classrooms worked just fine for decades.

Solution FAIL, and it is appallingly sexist.

[seabeyond]

11. how does it make any sense to assume that mixed gender classrooms are the problem now?

another excellent point. and what i see in the fail.... is parents not doing their job, or the kids. i do not see it in the schools. and i do not see it in gender performance. that is personal experience. i DO see a lot of people making excuses for little johnny, all over the place. having two boys, and fighting the trend really really hard up thru middle school, it pisses me off. there is such a push to make our boys less from society, media and the parents buying into it feeding it to the boys.

that is my issue.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. Young men are less likely to be enrolled in college than their fathers were.

The US population has increased 44% since 1975, while the number of men enrolled in college has grown about 30%.

And because co-ed primary education (the way we currently do it) discourages girls from science and math, the students who enter college are, as a group, less proficient in it than they were a generation ago.

Want to increase STEM enrollment in college? Single sex classrooms. It improves boys educational outcomes, AND encourages girls to learn science and math.

[ismnotwasm]

22. That of course explains why enrollment in medical school is now 50/50

Or thereabouts. Residency is also at half. It would also explains why women are breaking ground in the sciences after decades oh excuse me millennia of sexism. Seriously, do you think history just arrived in the last few decades?

Your data is flawed because it is incomplete.

Are you actually implying women are not profient enough? That separating the genders is the single best improvement we can make to improve our education system?

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. Simple logic.

Women outnumber men in college.
Men are less likely to attend college than the previous generation.
Are women underrepresented in the sciences? Is this due to inadequate math and science teaching in HS? If the answers are yes, then a smaller proportion of college students are getting science and engineering training in college.

You just said it yourself. Women are 60% of college students, yet comprise only half of med school graduate students. 50% women constitutes underrepresentation. Single sex classrooms cultivate girls interest in the sciences.

Boys and girls do not perform their stereotyped acts for the benefit of their own gender. They do it to attract the attention of the opposite sex. Remove that motivation from the classroom and they focus their energies in academically useful ways.

[MadrasT]

25. This is where I disagree

Last edited Fri Aug 24, 2012, 09:47 AM - Edit history (1)

Single sex classrooms cultivate girls interest in the sciences.

Boys and girls do not perform their stereotyped acts for the benefit of their own gender. They do it to attract the attention of the opposite sex. Remove that motivation from the classroom and they focus their energies in academically useful ways.

I don't believe that girls and boys stop competing socially amongst themselves when you remove the "other" gender from the environment.

And what about LGBT students?

The last thing we need to do is put kids in an environment that reinforces half the people in the world are mysterious "others", so much different, in fact, that they require different institutional treatment.

I want gendered treatment to disappear. I want equality of treatment and opportunity for all, and "separate but equal somehow if you factor in differences we make to accommodate gendered stereotypes that we will apply purely based on the shape of your genitals" does not fly for me.

I think reinforcement of gendered stereotypes by separating classes into penis/vagina is a bad solution.

We need to see the "other" gender as human beings first. Not as "vagina species" and "penis species". And people need to stop assuming they know anything about anybody based on their genitals. It's lazy, insulting, and offensive.

We have to stop"OTHERING" girls and women. Not do more of it. Once you institutionally "OTHER" large groups of people, they become not part of your tribe (the enemy).

I am not defined by my vagina, no matter how many ways society tries to make it so.

I can't support a system that tells girls "You can do or be anything you want but you have to follow the Pink Path to get there:" Fuck that. I choose my path.

[MadrasT]

26. And

Last edited Fri Aug 24, 2012, 07:50 AM - Edit history (1)

And if we to stop a "problem' caused by "opposite sex" presence - boys intimidating girls in STEM if that happens - teach the kids how to act in a way that helps them cope better if they feel intimidated, and to stop being intimidating if they are acting that way.

The real world is not separated by gender. Men and women have to be able to interact productively without harming each other everywhere else. I hate the idea of putting kids in insular bubbles.

If girls are afraid to speak up and display intellligence in front of boys, let's figure out how to fix the problem so it doesn't exist. How do we remove the fear? Not by shielding girls from the scary thing.

Removing boys is not a real world solution unless those women are going to live on an all female island after graduation.

As for "protecting" boys by removing the "distraction" of girls"? To me that is one step close to making women wear burkhas, covering their faces, hiding in the shadows. No way. no how.

Scary.

[redqueen]

28. Oh so very well said.

Treat the causes, not the symptoms.

[ismnotwasm]

10. It's funny

The only legitimate reason I can think of for segregated school systems is protection. Genders protected from one another because society loves its gender lines and doesn't love crossover. So to simplify and misdirect education becomes gender oriented; girls learn one way and boys another, when the truth of the matter is people learn in different ways. I would like to see Valuing teachers and public education in the ways they/it should be valued in order to recognize these learning types with the proper resources to implement teaching skills for our youth----independent of gender

Also To me, the right thing to do would be to educate about gender stereotypes from a very young age; to teach kids to recognize them and techniques to combat them when necessary.

[redqueen]

12. " people learn in different ways "

That's how I see it.

The 'boys are like this, girls are like that' approach seems like nothing but lazy thinking.

[MadrasT]

15. Lazy thinking, at best.

I keep getting visions in my head of various religions that separate men and women in different ways to different degrees.

Combine religious fundamentalism with the various prongs of the ever-strengthening war on women by the GOP with separate gender classrooms?

I don't like it one bit.

[seabeyond]

16. i jsut cannot imagine we would want to deny a whole different manner in discussing the issues

to put it in the box to be seen as only one way and say this is a good thing. to eliminate a whole genders view, or way of communicating that view, or thoughts and opinions. to me, it sounds like limiting the kids education.

[seabeyond]

13. oldest sons kindergarten teacher gave a book on the different learning styles cause she recognized

immediately he had issues, in class. she had me come in and just observe in one of the classes. gave me a book, i studied and from that point on we started working on his issues. beginning of every school year clear up to 8th grade, i gathered the teachers before class started and we had conversation about the kid. by then we had such a pool of information and knowledge and son had learned so many tools to deal with his issue, that stepping into high school was his to do. he has the same issues. but... he knows them, can recognize them and has developed tools to minimize them.

every school my kids have been in, every school adm, and almost every teacher hands down, worked for the best for the kid.

maybe i am lucky. but i cannot believe i am that lucky.

[seabeyond]

14. i started around third grade telling teachers to have higher EXPECTATIONS of my kids.

after the first handful of years with the kids in the system and listening to the teachers delicately walking around issues with the boys, and me saying it the way it was, for them to ultimately, hesitantly agree, i just started to flat out tell the teachers that we have high expectations in our home and i expect the teacher to have the same with my kids. i told them that the kids would meet what was expected of them or get damn close. closer than having no expectations or the very least.

the thing, at a certain time we decided we did not want to put that pressure on the kids. somehow expectation became a bad word. my kids werent a part of it then, i just walked into it. the teachers had a hard time even hearing me say the word expectation. each school.... learned about me when i walked into those halls, though. they knew my kids. they knew me. i knew them. they got that i was not asking for UNREALISTIC expectations. just higher than were we were at. that we could expect a kid to behave. not perfect, but for the most part. we could expect kids to put serious time into school, or to think, or to express.

it would be like they do with the girls in PE. the girls never work as hard as the boys, cause they are girls. they dont push it as much, cause they are girls.

BULLSHIT

we create this people.

[One_Life_To_Give]

29. Glad I wasn't forced to attend a class with all of the other Phallus bearers.

Back in the stone age we used ability to segregate groups. Math geeks with math geeks, average people with average people etc. We weren't enlightened enough to ask what was in their pants. I don't recall any academic classes that when so separated were mono-gender. Save the Phallused do Shop, non do HomeEc.

Each child is unique and will show an educator what it is they need to be successful. We need to provide educators with the tools they need to do that. However what lies within one's knickers doesn't say much about a child's abilities compared to what is already staring one in the face.