Presented By:

Jamie Carpenter
Greg Hutchings
Bronwyn MacFarlane
Holly Richard

Power Point
Presentation On Gender in Education

Travis Burns
Antoine Hickman
Patricia Kern
Shelly Nowacek

Power Point
Presentation On Special Education

Webmaster:
Jamie Carpenter

Administrative Implications

School administrators are legally responsible for compliance with Title IX legislation providing equal opportunity for both males and females in public and private educational environments that receive federal funds. This includes not only the right to attend such institutions and participate in academic and athletic activities, but to do so without fear of gender discrimination and sexual harassment. Those organizations found to violate Title IX requirements can be held liable for compensatory damages under certain circumstances. While the majority of public and private institutions have become coeducational since this legislation, single-sex education remains an area of controversy due to the conflict over equal opportunity for both genders and research regarding brain-based and gender differences in learning. Current “No Child Left Behind” legislation demonstrates a shift back toward single-sex education in some circumstances in order to effect improvement in student achievement. This underscores the importance of educators and legislators remaining aware of both legal requirements and best practices in education for the benefit of both sexes.

A key word in the definition of gender self-confidence is “genuine”- one must genuinely respect and value oneself as a female or male person in order to be gender self confident (Hoffman & Whitney, 1998). Gender self-confidence has been identified as an aspect of one's gender self-concept (Hoffman, 1998). It refers to one's genuine self-assuredness about being female or male, how much one accepts, respects, and values oneself as a female or male person (Hoffman & Whitney, 1998). Students need a safe place to explore the pressures, problems, and alternatives they have as males and females (Koegel, 1994). In addition, a randomized control trial of single-sex and mixed-sex mathematics classes at Ballarat High School found that students in single-sex classes showed consistently higher gains in confidence over time, with confidence being a significant predictor of achievement (Rowe, 1988).

Research shows single-sex classrooms tend to produce girls with more confidence and higher grades (Hancock & Kalb, 1996). A study conducted by Fergusson, Horwood, and Woodward (1999), showed evidence of a pervasive tendency for children attending single-sex schools to obtain higher levels of educational achievement compared with children attending coeducational schools. These differences in achievement were reflected in a range of educational outcomes including: School certification attainment; reading ability at age 18; seventh form entry; leaving school without educational qualifications; and exposure to unemployment. These differences clearly suggest that entry into a single-sex school was a selective process in which those attending single-sex schools tended to be more academically able, had better social adjustment, and were more socially advantaged (Fergusson, Horwood, and Woodward, 1999).

Delinquent behaviors were found to be more normative in coeducational schools, due to the social composition of coeducational schools and greater social and sexual pressures, and opportunities that may impede their educational achievement (Fergusson, Horwood, and Woodward, 1999). More generally, problem behaviors such as stealing, drug use, frequent sexual intercourse, and fighting were less common among girls enrolled in single-sex schools compared to girls enrolled in coeducational schools (Fergusson, Horwood, and Woodward, 1999).

“It's not radical to suggest that some children and adolescents might do better academically in the absence of the opposite sex. Boys and girls tend to have different styles of learning. Each group is inevitably affected by the proximity of the other. Chapman (1997) reported that boys were more prone to show off in one way or another to get the attention of girls, while girls may be reluctant to betray their intelligence lest they scare off boys. The problems associated with these realities could be eliminated by separating the sexes (Chapman, 1997). Perhaps single-sex education will ride out of the sunset as a successful—and legal—educational alternative (Newquist, 1997).

Supporters of coeducation insist that separating the sexes is not conducive for students learning to operate in the real world, could lead to more sexism, and undermine decades of work in brining equality through Title IX. But advocates of single-sex education point to evidence that suggest increased academic performance and attitudes of students attending single-sex schools. Most studies of single-sex schools have occurred in private schools or overseas and thus questions remain regarding whether the research documented would be replicated among diverse public populations and whether the outcomes are related to the nature of the students and the families.

Societal Implications

Unfortunately, many girls and boys do not typically grow up in an environment that encourages genuine respect and value for them as females or males (Hoffman & Whitney, 1998). In schools and society at large, girls receive many messages about females revolving around compliance, attractiveness, and caring for others. Although they may be encouraged verbally to become anything that they want to be, the more subtle yet more pervasive and influential messages are to look good and put others' needs first (Hoffman & Whitney, 1998).

Existing paradigms must be acknowledged as the gendered nature of schooling which a part of the larger society. Educators cannot single-handedly change the value structure we ourselves embody, but we can acknowledge and begin to question the ways in which gender influences our schooling. The emotions and the power dynamics of sex, race, and social class are present, but evaded, aspects of our classroom (Bailey, 1996). For both girls and boys, the subtle pressures to conform to traditional or stereotypical gender roles promote conditional regard, and mitigate the development of genuine valuing of self as females and males (Bailey, 1996).

Despite the lag in school achievement, despite the fact that girls have typically always received higher grades and more boys go to prison, men still outnumber women at the highest levels of academia, as well as in business and government (Gilligan, 2006). It is this societal disparity that may see a reverse in years to come but has not manifested equitably to date.

Educational Implications

Educators are considering what can be implemented to accommodate the differences between the sexes and different programs are being tested. Tyre (2006) reported on an elementary school in Colorado , looking at the gap between boys and girls. Boys were lagging 10 points behind girls in reading and 14 points in writing. Many more boys than girls were being labeled as learning disabled, too. So reminiscent of how educators focused upon making classroom girl-friendly, now the administration asked teachers to read about the minds of boys to foster boy-friendly classrooms. Then teachers replaced lecture time with fast-moving lessons that administrators claimed all kids could enjoy. For example, instead of discussing a book, students were divided into small groups, and one student in each group pretended to be a character from the book. Classes are noisier, but the principals claimed the boys are closing the gap. Girls continued to score higher on tests but the boys also scored respectable. The following queries were not addressed: What specifically happened to the girls' scores based upon the instructional delivery change? Did the girls' scores stay the same, decrease, or increase?

It is important for administrators to learn and understand that the goal should not be “closing the achievement gap,” which alludes to putting a ceiling on the brightest students, rather the goal should be continually increasing and improving all scores. Therefore it important to understand and recognize that a gap will always exist between ability levels but that by “raising the achievement levels of all learners,” it will be at a higher cognitive level for all students. It is imperative to not stagnate and forsake gifted student learning needs just to raise lower ability levels.

Gender specific education allows professionals to focus upon specific needs to support students. While there is great support for special needs, at-risk students and some level of support for gifted students, there is great concern that middle-performing students who are struggling are falling through the cracks without specific support that perhaps single-sex classes could provide ( Tyre , 2006). Girls typically reach sexual maturity two years ahead of boys which can put boys at a disadvantage in the classroom. A non-visible difference may also put boys at a disadvantage; the prefrontal cortex is a knobby region of the brain directly behind the forehead that scientists believe helps humans organize complex thoughts, control their impulses and understand the consequences of their own behavior. Tyre (2006) reported that in the last five years, Dr. Jay Giedd, an expert in brain development at the National Institutes of Health, has used brain scans to show that in girls, it reaches its maximum thickness by the age of 11 and, for the next decade or more, continues to mature. In boys, this process is delayed by 18 months. MRI tracing brain activity research has also found that middle-school boys may use their brains less efficiently but that comparatively, teenage girls are able to process information faster. Brain research does not provide full information on understanding brain processing by not addressing to what degree temperament, family background and environment play too. Some high-achieving boys are equal to or more organized and assertive than the highest-achieving girls ( Tyre , 2006).

Based upon the 1954 case Brown v. the Board of Education , AAUW argues that separate is inherently unequal but the United States Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which appropriated $3 million for grants to local educational agencies for “programs to provide same-gender schools and classrooms (consistent with applicable law and in compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972).” Administrators at schools which are separating the girls from the boys, such as Roncalli Middle School , in Pueblo , Colo. , report the single-sex segregation to be helping students of both genders. With parental approval, guidance counselors have assigned random sample groups of sixth graders to single-sex classes in core subjects to compare achievement results ( Tyre , 2006). However the question regarding differentiation in the structure and the same quality of instruction delivered is not known. At the private Marlborough high school for girls in L.A. , Tyre (2006) reported the outcome differences for the students to be one of attitude: girls perceive themselves as more competent and are more willing to pursue advanced work in fields such as math and science.

The Bush administration endorsed single-sex public schools and classes which create an alternate parallel universe where smart matters more than anything, good looks hold little currency and a strong sense of self is paramount. The opportunity for single-sex education has specific implications for students who historically have been denied access to it. It may be a valuable tool if students (such as poor students, minorities and girls) who may stand to benefit the most and profit in single-sex environments are targeted. Usually only upper-middle class and wealthy families could afford single-sex education. Due to tuition costs, participation in such single-sex educational environments were not available to the majority of American students attending public schools ( Tyre , 2006).

In 1997, California instituted the largest experiment to date in single-sex education with a statewide program for funding “single-gender academies” in six school districts. Each participating district provided $500,000 in funding to operate one middle or high school academy for boys and an identical complete program for girls. Today only one of the academic remains open. In a study completed in 2001, a mix of positive and negative results were reported. It was determined that the initiative suffered from implementation problems and funding discontinued therefore tracking achievement level changes was not conclusive because most of the schools closed within two years (NASBE).

School Evaluation for Compliance with Title IX

The following areas must be evaluated to determine if your school is in compliance with Title IX:

A. Participation (School must meet one of the three parts listed below)

Part 1: Male to Female student population ratio is roughly the same as its Male to Female student athlete population

Part 2: School must consistently provide added opportunities for women in the past and continues to do so.

Part 3: School must fully accommodate interests and abilities that exist among the female student population.

B. Benefits and Services

Schools must treat both female and male athletes equally overall, however, they are not required to spend the same amount of money on both programs. The following areas should be considered when determining if benefits and services are fairly distributed between male and female athletes:
• Overall budgets for male and female programs (including income from booster clubs, concession stand profits and fundraisers)
• Equipment and uniforms (including replacement schedules and quality)
• Scheduling games and practice times (including quality of competition and post-season play)
• Travel and related expenses (including meals, mode of transportation, overnight stays)
• Availability of coaches and their compensation
• Locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities (including maintenance, seating, scoreboards, conditions of playing fields, courts, pools)
• Medical and training services (including weight training, trainers, insurance)
• Publicity (including press, cheerleading, awards and recognition)
• Recruitment (primarily for college)
• Tutors and their compensation (primarily for college)
• Housing and dining facilities and services (primarily for college)
• School-sponsored athletic banquets and social events

C. Scholarship
The percentages of total athletic scholarship dollars awarded to male and female athletes must be within 1% of their participation rates.

Read the Complete Paper