BOYS ARE better at science and math. Girls' strengths lie in the humanities. Although many would immediately refute such blatant gender stereotypes, a growing number of single-sex classes in public schools are helping promote them. As the Bush administration supports the expansion of single-sex education, public schools across the nation need to resist the trend.
The Leave No Child Behind initiative and increased emphasis on improving standardized test scores drives educators to experiment with new ways to raise the bar. Some are turning to gender-separated classrooms, especially in high-poverty or at-risk urban schools eager to find a fast way to make large strides in improving education.
Proponents of single-sex education argue, "The brains of girls and boys are built very differently"
(www.singlesexschools.org). Dividing boys and girls allows teachers to focus on the learning styles specific to each gender -- competitive for boys, collaborative for girls. They believe this will decrease negative behaviors boys exhibit and increase girls' confidence.
What students most need, though, is a taste of reality. Education is most effective when it is practical, and the classroom should model the world ahead of students as much as possible. Teachers increasingly are incorporating problems-based learning and interdisciplinary projects into their curriculum. Community organizations and businesses are establishing partnerships with schools, allowing students to witness the real-life application of their schoolwork. Worksheets only are encountered in schools, not in the real world, and many teachers are phasing them out. Gender-separation similarly only exists in schools, not in the workplace, and thus single-sex classes do not mimic reality.
In 1972 Title IX made it illegal for schools to discriminate against students based on gender. Today the U.S. Department of Education is looking into the possibility of adapting the law to allow for more single-sex classes (www.knox
news.com).
Since 1972, public education increasingly has become more mainstream, with students of all learning classifications working together. In most schools, students with physical and mental disabilities and those labeled gifted are grouped in one classroom. Schools adopt inclusion to ensure all students receive equal access to a challenging education. They want to foster a sense of community, not separateness. If single-sex classes catch on, schools will break down the community they have spent years building.
Dividing students in middle elementary grades or during middle school will work only to increase misconceptions between the sexes. Barriers weaken when students work together. Maybe it's true that girls are more collaborative and boys are more competitive. Then again, maybe it's not. No matter what, students need to be challenged to work in ways to which they are not accustomed, with people outside their comfort zone. Teachers need to challenge their own educational practice and employ strategies to cater to the needs of students regardless of gender, ethnicity or religion. Separating students on the basis of gender makes the job too easy for both students and teachers.
If students are grouped at all, it should be on the basis of interests, not gender. At Williamsburg Middle School in Arlington, Virginia, eighth-grade girls can elect to take "Science for Girls" in addition to their regular science requirement ("More Teachers Bonding With Single-Sex Classes," The Washington Post, Sept. 9). Next year the program may be expanded to include "Math for Girls" as another course option. Although such classes are electives, their mere presence in the public school sends out a clear message: Teachers expect girls to perform differently in math and science than boys. Offering additional math and science classes is a great idea, especially for middle schoolers discovering their strengths and passions in particular fields. Because so much of learning is social, students should get to share this experience with those who share their passions, even if they are of the other gender.
Schools today face the challenge of meeting elevated standards. No matter what program a student is placed in, at the end of the year he'll still have to pass the same standardized test as everyone else. Dividing girls and boys into different classes on the premise that their brains work differently risks taking equity out of education. If a teacher assumes that every girl in her class learns the same way, she will cheat many of her students out of an equal education, and their test scores could suffer.
Educators need to learn from the mistakes of the past. Separate but equal didn't work before. There's no reason to think it'll work now.
(Stephanie Batten's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily.
She can be reached at sbatten@
cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | 7 hours agoPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 6 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
