Evergreen Leader

Oppose Subversive Attempts to =
Undermine Title IX

Angelea Colaiuta, Angela, Association Field Director

colaiuta@aauw.org

Wednesday, March 17, =
2004 11:56 =
AM

On March 3, =
2004, the Department of Education published their recommended

changes to amend Title IX regulations =93to provide more flexibility =
for

educators to establish single-sex classes and schools at the elementary =
and

secondary levels."

Currently, Title IX regulations already allow for the establishment of =
single-sex schools and classrooms in certain situations as long as =
comparable education opportunities are created for the excluded =
sex.  In fact, there are currently 24 single-sex public schools in =
the United =
States.  =
Single-sex classes and schools can be created to remedy past =
discrimination to allow girls and women to overcome historical barriers =
to equal education.  Other =
specific circumstances in which Title IX allows for single-sex =
classes

are competitive athletics, human sexuality classes, and choirs.

But the new Title IX regulations would throw out the most basic legal =
standards prohibiting sex discrimination in education.  The =
Administration=92s proposed regulation change authorizes the most =
general and even admittedly unproven assertions as adequate =
justification for sex-segregated schools and classes.  Schools =
would be able to create and parents would be able to demand separate =
programs to which only boys or only girls may apply, based on any =
untested belief that it would bring some sort of educational =
benefit.

More specifically, AAUW ' s is concerned about the proposed regulations =
change because:

These regulations divert attention away from real education =
problems.  The REAL problems in education are lack of funding, a =
shortage of teachers, overcrowded classrooms, inadequate facilities, and =
poor technology in the classroom.  This Administration should be =
implementing sound, proven strategies that lead to results.  =
Instead, they want to experiment on our nation's children - and gut =
civil rights laws in the process.

The proposed regulations pose NO accountability requirements consistent =
with the No Child Left Behind Act.  Although NCLB placed a premium =
on implementing strategies that are based in sound science, the proposed =
regulations break from this standard.  Schools are not required to =
demonstrate that there is a significant education problem needing to be =
fixed, and they are not required to demonstrate that single-sex classes =
or

schools will fix such a problem.  Schools will have the authority =
to" tinker" with gender equity without having to prove grounds that such =
actions are even necessary.  Furthermore, while the regulations =
suggest that schools evaluate single-sex practices periodically, there =
is no requirement that the schools report these internal evaluations to =
the Office of Civil Rights (OCR), or that the evaluations be =
scientifically valid or reliable.

These regulations are unnecessary.  Title IX already allows =
flexibility.  Single-sex =
classes and schools can be created to remedy past discrimination to =
allow girls and women to overcome historical barriers to equal =
education.  Other specific =
circumstances in which Title IX allows for single-sex classes are =
competitive athletics, human sexuality classes, and choirs. Thus, there =
is no need to gut one of this country's most successful civil rights =
laws.

The proposed regulations would undermine the standard that separate is =
inherently unequal.  Although the regulations require" =
substantially equal" opportunities for both sexes they do not require =
equal opportunities class-by-class or even subject-by-subject.  =
Schools are only required to offer a "substantially equal" coeducational =
class for the excluded sex.  By making the case that single-sex =
classes or schools are better in certain situations, schools would be =
necessarily creating an unequal learning environment were they only have =
to provide that benefit to one sex.