The Idea of an Essay, Volume 2

84 Title IX was designed to “[allow] for single-sex schools if the school can show that the single-sex program was designed to overcome past gender discrimination” (Brown 358); however, many think that separating children based on gender is a form of discrimination. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed many lawsuits on behalf of families and communities that feel wronged or offended by the establishment of single-sex schools or classrooms in their district. Christina Brown, Ph.D., discusses one example, a lawsuit between Beckenridge County Middle School and the ACLU. Starting in 2003, Beckenridge initiated gender segregation in math and science classes, but by 2004, they had created single- sex classes for almost every relevant subject, including the four core classes: math, history, science, and English (360). The middle school teachers also began teaching boys and girls differently, doing things such as playing reviews games with the boys but only quizzing the girls or letting boys be loud in class while girls were instructed to be quiet (360). The schools probably thought they were inside the boundaries of the law, but they had made several mistakes, including not allowing the parents a choice on single-sex or coeducation. After the classes had been implemented, the school sent a letter to the parents, but not all the parents received it. Parents complained and, together with the ACLU, sued the school (360-361). This short case study shows that implementing single-sex education can be risky for schools because of the large margin for error; if even one person does not know the laws, the entire school can be sued. In addition to numerous influential outside factors, the lack of neurological differences, and the legal problems that come with establishing single-sex schools, it seems that there is simply not enough solid evidence to claim that gender separation in single-sex schools is the source of student success. In fact, according to Halpern et al. “there is no empirical evidence that [students’] success stems from their [single-sex] organization, as opposed to the quality of the student body, demanding curricula, and many other features also known to promote achievement at coeducational schools” (1706). Without evidence, one cannot justify the costs and effort needed to start and run a single-sex school. To start a public, single-sex school requires more teachers, classrooms, and funds than most school districts have available. Also, in order to offer single-sex education, school districts have to make co-educational schools available. This