America’s public schools are failing. Plagued by insufficient funds, underpaid teachers, and a useless standardized testing system, our public schools need change and innovation. Thanks to a recent relaxing of Department of Education rules, we may see just that, in the form of single-sex education.
Beginning Nov. 24, public schools are allowed to be divided by sex, and new single-sex schools can be opened more easily. The new regulations received support across party lines, with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) spearheading for the inclusion of single-sex options within the “”No Child Left Behind”” framework.
The new regulations are revisions of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prevents any form of discrimination between sexes in federally funded schools. And unlike the largely unpopular No Child Left Behind program, the government appears to have gotten it right this time – by loosening the rules for once – with the goal of expanding educational options for parents. The new rules allow for single-sex schools and classes so long as participation is voluntary and there is an equivalent co-ed or opposite-sex school or class. Many states have opened new schools in anticipation of the rule change.
Single-sex education is already popular in the private sphere. But the ability to pay for such an option should not limit a child’s educational opportunities. Learning is not one size fits all; some may thrive in a same-sex environment.
A 2000 Cambridge University study found that separating children by sex improved boys’ concentration and improved test scores; a 1990 study at Rhode Island’s Providence University tracked the outcomes of students at Catholic schools, finding that women in single-sex classrooms uniformly outperformed those at co-ed schools.
Other studies have looked at the learning differences between genders. Some students may feel more comfortable just being around their own gender, giving them the opportunity to participate more freely in class. A boy may not contribute to a poetry discussion in English class for fear of embarrassing himself in front of the girls, for instance.
Single-sex schooling is a great option for many parents and students. However, it will only work with proper planning. Simply dividing classes by sex is not a solution: Simply shoving testosterone-driven teenage males into one room will likely prove unproductive. The point of same-sex schooling is to draw from each gender’s strengths, and curriculum must be adjusted to suit the specific needs of each gender, with lessons based upon their learning styles. Curricula should emphasize the idea of gender equality and not to reinforce gender stereotypes. This will only work with sufficient support from parents, teachers and the school administrators who determine curricula.
The new regulations do not amount to segregation, as enrollment is completely voluntary. As opposed to racial segregation of the past, schools must be “”comparable”” in that the same amount of money is spent on each and facilities and faculty are of the same quality. Also, racial differences are not real, while gender differences are: studies have shows that the brains of men and women are physiologically different. If a parent believes these differences matter enough for their child to go to a single-sex school, then the option should be available.
This is not only about whether single-sex or co-ed schools are better, but about giving parents – and their children – the greatest number of opportunities possible. And the opening of public single-sex school gives parents more choice in how their kids learn. We are a country that places a high value on having an educated population and we should provide a variety of ways to learn. These new regulations are an innovative change in a schooling system that desperately needs it.
