Get Schooled

By V for Vendetta

January 11, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

Why not? Personally, I think it denies kids important socialization skills and what not. It seems rather archaic. But I’m all for options, so I’m not about to stand in the way of someone who wants to send his kid there.

Although, I’ve met a few kids from strict private schools. They were always the wildest ones! :-)

By JustMe

January 11, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

If the demand is there, Gwinnett should offer the same option for boys.

The State approved that school, fine. However, if there are parents of boys in Gwinnett that want to, this does open up the Gwinnett school system to possible law suits. The State doesn’t care because it isn’t them that would be sued.

As a tax payer, I am fine with these types of schools - as long as they are held to the same standards and requirements as other schools. What bothers me is when people want to compare apples to oranges. For example, you cannot compare public to private schools because they do not have the same requirements (there are no EOCT in private schools, for example).

By SET

January 11, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

Yes it is acceptable. Different groups have different needs. One size does not fit all. Creating some programs that are sex segregated is permissible but only some.

I could have a problem with a state setting up a network of men only colleges and women only med schools. I do not have a problem with secondary schools doing so because of the problems associated with puberty and behavior. The older the students are, the more difficult it is explaining why the government can’t maintain order without sex segregation.

This issue has racial overtones also. The same arguments here work nicely in explaining the need to have racially segregated prisons - for example (They won’t leave each other alone!!). California maintained racially segregated prison intake units I believe until recently when one of the appellate courts foolishly interfered and said since all people are equal we have to throw the most dangerous people in the state into forcibly integrated close quarters housing and let the shanks fall where they may.

It’s a tangent, I know but schools do not exist in a vacumn. They are institutions just like the prisons and when the courts want to play administrator it’s just too bad if people and staff get hurt or killed, or have a bad experience.

At what point to we want the courts to run things from afar based on “principles” rather than let the locals run their institutions for the safety and benefit of those who are forced to go there? Do we even have one simple answer for these situations?

By Teacher01

January 11, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Can not wait til it goes public!

By Atlanta Pearl Girl

January 11, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

I think it’s a GREAT idea…..especially for the girls….

By JustMe

January 11, 2008 2:59 PM | Link to this

I think that it is funny how our society continues to think that “all people are created equal.” IMHO that is not true.

As a teacher, we are to do to “differentiated instruction” because all students are not the same. And, for the “lower level” classes, we are told to use examples from their culture so that they learn better (ie: speak their slang, etc.). If we are all the same, shouldn’t one teaching method work for everyone?

Talk about mixed signals…..

By Bart

January 11, 2008 3:18 PM | Link to this

There was a Simpson’s episode that dealt with this…and we all know how that turned out.

By Dixie-Dawg

January 11, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this

It’s about time the public schools started moving forward instead of holding on to the old industrial schooling mentality. Boys and girls learn differently and therefore it is in the best interest to teach them differently. Public schools were originally created to produce better workers for industry and that approach hasn’t changed even though our needs have. We need thinkers and leaders not production line workers. I hope they take some other simple ideas like uniforms and put them to work as well.

By Kevin

January 11, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this

Pinecrest Academy in Cumming separates boys and girls for all classes starting in the fourth grade.

By Cammi317

January 11, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

I think it’s great. They can play together during recess….

By Tony

January 11, 2008 4:20 PM | Link to this

Schools should be able to determine how children are grouped. Hopefully, that would be accomplished in a manner that had parental involvement and support.

There is evidence that supports single-sex classes having a positive effect on student learning.

By DB

January 11, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

My child currently attends one of the private schools that segregate sexes in the middle school. The teachers have, in casual conversation, commented how much they like it, how much calmer the classes are and how much more attentive the kids are since they aren’t distracted. As one teacher laughed, “when you have boys and girls in the same class at this age, you can practically see the hormones bouncing off each other in the air!”

Anything that helps kids focus on schoolwork instead of the cute boy/girl at the next desk is a plus, in my book.

JustMe, that line about “all people are created equal” is the most mis-used phrase in the world! The meaning is “… created equal under the law”, which meant that the laws applied to everyone, equally. As you noted, it’s silly — and, in a sense, disrespectful — to apply the same principal to individuals, whose needs and abilities vary wildly from person to person.

By AgnesScottGrad2000

January 11, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

I graduated from a women’s college after attending co-ed public schools for 13 years. Without a doubt, attending a women’s college was the best thing that ever happened to me. It allowed me to focus completely on my academic work, to excel in leadership and to take risks I never considered before—because I was in a comfortable environment where I didn’t have the distraction or disruption of boys. As students, we were all there because we wanted that type of environment. Could I have been as successful at a co-ed college? Probably. But being a women’s college gave me the opportunity to focus as I never had at co-ed schools before. My husband and I are presently expecting our first child, and we will be seeking out single-sex education for him or her when the time comes. I highly recommend single-sex education for most everyone. Those who say students miss out on socialization don’t realize that socialization can come from your extended family, house of worship, community clubs, volunteering and neighborhood, not just the child’s school. I’m just not that concerned about that perceived “social deficit.” And bring on the uniforms!!! School is for learning—not a fashion show.

By jim d

January 11, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

The fact that the Gwinnett BOE and Alvin have been sooo Wrooong on other issues tends to make me believe they are wrooooong on this one.

Rather humorous thing is that they turned down this charter saying it violated federal laws, regardless of the fact it is being done in other states. Keep in mind that this is the same group of people who refuse to abide by Thurmond Bakers opinon that they violate state law every time they vote to buy property behind closed doors.

One can only hope that taxpayers send a strong message in Feb. when asked to approve a bond issue.

By Vicki

January 11, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

I think it would benefit the students to be separated in to same sex classes. Now if the schools could/would also group the students according to their abilities maybe the gifted students would not be cast aside for the lower performing students.

By Vicki

January 11, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

I think it would benefit the students to be separated in to same sex classes. Now if the schools could/would also group the students according to their abilities maybe the gifted students would not be cast aside for the lower performing students.

By catlady

January 11, 2008 6:17 PM | Link to this

Both my daughters (Wesleyan, 1999; Agnes Scott, 2007), my mom, and my five aunts graduated from women’s colleges. Any and all would have been fine in co-ed schools, but single-sex programs were a boost for all of them. None suffered from any socialization problems.

My granddaughter will be a candidate for the Ivy School, or one like it serving younger students, in five years. Single-sex education can help extremely bright girls do even better, IMHO.

When I was looking at colleges in the late 60’s, so many of the best private colleges would not accept women. Hard to believe now!

By HB

January 11, 2008 8:16 PM | Link to this

I think kids need balance, so I’m not sure about total single-sex education, but I know of several schools where a boys’ and a girls’ school will pair up and offer some classes (usually electives or advanced classes) and extracurricular activities together. That seems like a good approach to me, allowing for both socialization and specialized learning. And I do think middle schoolers would benefit most from single-sex ed.

Catlady, just curious — did any of your relatives attend girls’ high schools before going to women’s colleges? I’ve always wondered if that might be too much separation for too long. I worked with an amazing high school student a few years ago who was offered scholarships to both Wellesley and Bowdoin. Because she attended an all-girl high school, her mom strongly encouraged her to go to Bowdoin, feeling that while single-sex ed has advantages, either her high school or college experience should be co-ed as it has advantages too. What do you think is best? Single-sex all the way through, or some of both?

By Racebaiter

January 11, 2008 8:19 PM | Link to this

Sounds good to me. Go ahead and fill it with home economics courses and keep them out of the real schools. Heh heh (ducking).

By dragonlady

January 11, 2008 8:53 PM | Link to this

I graduated from a woman’s college (too many years ago to count) and my experience at Wesleyan was great. I like the idea of separation. The girls are forced into leadership positions when no boys are there—otherwise they tend to hang back and let the boys do the leading.

By Dave

January 11, 2008 9:44 PM | Link to this

As a middle school teacher I love the idea. Distractions would be significantly decreased. Studies have also shown that girls in particular have higher achievements in Math and Science in single-sex classes. Don’t tell me about socialization- that’s not the purpose of school. Students have all summer, every afternoon and evening, every weekend and every school holiday to develop their social skills with friends, in sports and extracurriculars, at church or other religious-affiliated groups. It’s not as if school is the only time they are let out of their cages!

By Ga Liberal

January 11, 2008 10:13 PM | Link to this

While we’re at it, lets require all the girls to cover their faces or better yet wear a burka. I’m sure we can get a lot of them real cheap. And let’s also make it illegal for a girl to sit in a car with a boy that not related to her. Say maybe 5 years in prison. And while we are at it, lets separate boys and girls in church and in movie theaters and restaurants. Yea, this is a real good idea. NOT!!!

By Larry

January 11, 2008 10:37 PM | Link to this

This is not, as many of you have supposed, a gender segregation issue.

Gender segregated education is when students in a defined age bracket attend exclusively male or female schools. This is not the situation in this case.

The absence of an all male school component makes an all female school a gender discrimination issue, which legally precludes public funding.

Although it isn’t a legal issue, the notion that separating genders would benefit females, but not males, is the essence of discrimination.

GCPS made the correct call and the state blew it, on this one.

By ron

January 12, 2008 6:37 AM | Link to this

An all girls school is fine.Don’t try an all boy’s school though,That’s illegal.

By WFC

January 12, 2008 6:53 AM | Link to this

Single sex high schools have one tremendous advantage: fewer distractions to learning. If you don’t believe this, visit Northview High School on a warm Spring day. It makes the Gold Club look like a convent.

By lynn d

January 12, 2008 7:44 AM | Link to this

Larry,

There is nothing stopping someone from starting an all boys’ school in Gwinnett. The founder of the girls’ school has her hands full. Starting one charter school is a ton of work, starting two at the same time, without the backing of a corporation, would be near impossible.

This is a CHOICE school — no one will be assigned to it and families don’t have to send their daughters. If there is enough interest in an all boys’ school, then members of the community can come together to start one.

By jitterbug

January 12, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this

Do it if it helps them learn. I have read that math and science class scores improved when either all boys, or all girls classes were taught

By Lane tucker

January 12, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

How about an all white boys school. Would that be acceptable

By Eleanora

January 12, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

I taught public school in NC. In middle school, we had single-sex math and science classes. We found that girls performed significantly better without boys present in those subjects. Young women aren’t socialized to do well in math and science; it’s considered “boys” territory. Nonsense! It was very gratifying to see those young girls grow up and excel in those areas and even choose them as college majors and careers.

By spiritraveller

January 12, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

There is a reason that the Supreme Court gives less scrutiny to gender-based classifications than to race-based classifications (which get the highest scrutiny).

There are obvious and good reasons that sometimes girls are treated differently than boys.

As long as boys and girls have the same opportunities, I see no problem with “separate but equal” as applied to boys and girls.

I would like to see Gwinnett create a similar program for boys, so that they will have the same opportunity to get an education without the clear and present distraction of the opposite sex as both genders enter puberty and their natural inclination shifts more to impressing each other than getting the most out of school.

But even if the option is only available for girls at the moment, I find it difficult to complain about ANYTHING that might improve the education of Georgia’s students, who have long suffered from the lowest or next to lowest quality of public education in the country. Within reason, anything that might improve education should be attempted.

By catlady

January 12, 2008 3:18 PM | Link to this

The problem with sex segregated colleges before was that there was no good ole girls club. If you were excluded from the good ole boys club available at Duke, Sewanee, etc., you had no comparable resource for the contacts you could make.

The most important part that some bloggers miss is that this is voluntary. And it would be terrific if some folks were brave enough (or willing to put in the thousands of hours necessary) to put a proposal together for a male-only school. Catholic schools used to be along these lines all the time.

Read “Learning Like a Girl”, a recent book on the establishment of a similiar school, and any of numerous reports by the American Assn. of University Women.

By Agnes Scott 2006

January 12, 2008 5:08 PM | Link to this

Great! Single gender schools are amazing as long as the curriculum is not changed because someone thinks boys should learn x,y and z and girls should learn a,b and c. Standard curriculum but different instruction methods!

By John

January 13, 2008 8:40 AM | Link to this

I personally spent the better part of 7th and 8th grade staring at Tammy Gaston and could not begin to tell you anything that Clinton Middleton was trying to teach me about math…. It probably would foster a better learning environment.

By SM

January 13, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

Absolutely! A. L. Miller School (for girls) and Lanier School (for boys) in Macon, Ga were not private schools but had high standards for all of the students! Some of you that don’t think that this environment works check the statistics. I know you will find that the problems that existed in those type schools were far less than the problems in the coed schools. Of course…for schools to be effective parents have to take the responsibility for their disruptive children and not place the blame on the schools.

By CommonSense

January 13, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this

I’m curious just how quickly it would take the thunder to start rolling if this article was entitled “No Girls Allowed”! Can this paper ever refrain from pathetic headline blasts created to stoke the flames of gender hatred? Shame on me, I spent time reacting to your ploy.

By Emily

January 13, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this

I teach at a middle school that currently segregates 7th graders by gender and has mixed 8th grade classes. The 7th graders are separated for academic classes but have lunch, P.E. and electives together. The separated classes work very well, and we like teaching this way. These students are more focused, better behaved, happier, and perform higher than my eighth graders (I teach both segregated and mixed classes).

About the improved performance for girls, I have not witnessed this. My male classes far outperform my female classes on a regular basis—and I teach English. However, I am still a big fan of this method and hope to continue teaching this way.

By Emily

January 13, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this

I teach at a middle school that currently segregates 7th graders by gender and has mixed 8th grade classes. The 7th graders are separated for academic classes but have lunch, P.E. and electives together. The separated classes work very well, and we like teaching this way. These students are more focused, better behaved, happier, and perform higher than my eighth graders (I teach both segregated and mixed classes).

About the improved performance for girls, I have not witnessed this. My male classes far outperform my female classes on a regular basis—and I teach English. However, I am still a big fan of this method and hope to continue teaching this way.

By Greg Leathers

January 13, 2008 9:43 PM | Link to this

Great idea. Let’s teach boys that girls are bad and must be separated. Same thing with girls, we must teach them that boys are all sexually molesting perverts and we must separate from them to learn. They have cooties. That is what this education is about. What about getting students to adapt to an integrated environment. I remember the same arguements being made to separate the races. They do better separately. The military tries to do the same with moral for the troops, saying openly gay soldiers will lower moral. Maybe we need to rise about this and expect and teach students together regardless of their sex or sexual orientation as it might be in the military.

By Agnes Scott 2008

January 13, 2008 10:23 PM | Link to this

I agree with some of my Scottie sisters that have posted on this topic. Single-sex schools are a great idea. The confidence I have gained as a student of an all women’s school is amazing. I definitely want the same for my daughter!

By doinou

January 14, 2008 6:08 AM | Link to this

With bi-sexuality being crammed down our throats these days, what’s the difference? Will lesbians be accepted? Will lesbians be initiated? How about transgendered?, and how long until males are suing to get in? I can’t see it serving a purpose in this century.

By DB

January 14, 2008 7:18 AM | Link to this

Ga Liberal and Greg Leathers, I think you’re just flaming or trolling, but where did you ever get the idea that a single sex school was designed to subjugate that entire sex, orto put down the opposite sex? Burkas?! Oh, please.

Middle school is TOUGH, guys, and it’s hard enough for girls, especially, to establish themselves as scholars when there is SO much pressure, both from their peers and from the media, etc., to sexualize every single damn thing these girls deal with. Ever flip through a Cosmo Girl magazine? Sex advice for 13 year olds?! Advice column after advice column on “how to attract a boy, how to get a boy, how to keep a boy …”, 16-year-old baby sisters of rock stars announcing their pregnancy, etc., etc. Yes, of course, most kids this age are beginning to be attracted to the opposite sex. But the societal brakes on behavior that this age used to have are gone. If same-sex schools give a “breather” to these girls AND boys and give them a chance early-on to establish their own identity, goals and interests without the added complications of “what will the boys/girls think”, that’s not a bad thing.

By jim d

January 14, 2008 7:26 AM | Link to this

Scuse me Mr. Larry,

Can we spell v-o-l-u-n-t-a-r-y?

Unless I’m sadly mistaken—this is the legal precedence that has been established.

GCPS still got it Wrooong!

By jim d

January 14, 2008 7:59 AM | Link to this

Ok Larry,

I went and looked it up. Here’s what I found;

the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which aims to have all children reading and doing math at grade level by 2014, allowed federal money to be used for innovative programs such as all-boys’ and all-girls’schools and classes.

Because the two laws contradicted, the NCLB act directed the Department of Education to amend Title IX regulations and give school districts guidelines so they could set up sex-segregated programs without fear of being sued.

The education department proposed guidelines in 2004 that would allow gender-separated classes in co-ed schools if they are voluntary and have a comparable co-ed class. The proposals also made clear that districts could offer a school for one sex without offering a school for the other.

You can read more here.

By jim d

January 14, 2008 8:04 AM | Link to this

My bad.

here is the link

By jim d

January 14, 2008 8:16 AM | Link to this

BTW Larry,

It would appear that Alvin and the chipmunks were not only wrong again, but that by denying the charter they actually violated DOE policy which allows—no actually encourages — single sex education.

By Greg Leathers

January 14, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this

DB,

You are full of it. I am tired of you whining about the realities of the world. 11-13 year old girls like guys, regardless of media pressure. Most have gone through puberty, so they are attracted to guys. I don’t care what the media says, kids and especially their parents have to take responsibility for their actions. I took responsibility for my actions. I am not whining and blaming the media like you. Stop saying girls have it harder than guys. They seem to be doing well getting into college. I believe over half of college students are women. They need to learn to socialize as well as interact in a mixed educational environment. If they want to experiment with private school, fine, but don’t waste tax payer money on feel good feminist pc crap.