I’ve been skeptical that bringing more men into the classroom will move the dial much on the boy troubles. While it’s helpful to have male role models, the big difference will come from figuring out how to teach literacy skills to boys in the early grades, a time when they aren’t ideally wired for that kind of instruction.

But I applaud the expansion of Troops to Teachers (80 percent of whom are men). They have a good track record. There’s no downside here.

Then we’re in real trouble, because that’s pretty much the only solution being embraced out there. Here’s a telling example from Prince George’s County outside Washington, a place where middle class African Americans have been settling for years. School performance there remains troubled.

From the Gazette, a suburban Maryland paper:

Thursday, Dec. 3, 2009
All-boys charter school OK’d by county board
Program may be located at shuttered Temple Hills building
by Megan McKeever | Staff Writer
A $3.8 million all-boys charter school recently approved by the Prince George’s County school board will likely be housed in one of the eight county schools shuttered last year, school officials said.

The Possibility Science Technology Engineering and Math Preparatory Academy and Public Charter School for Boys, approved Nov. 18, was the only charter school approved out of six applications. Charter schools are managed independently by outside organizations or individuals but are funded by the public school system with taxpayer money.

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s not as odd as it sounds. Our youngest daughter graduated from the only Ivy that at times has been challenged by gender imbalances, and many of the women there were aware that their academic credentials appeared to exceed those of the male students. Had she come across a male student from North Dakota it’s possible this thought might have crossed her mind: Special admit?

The letter I received in response to my USA Today commentary:

To Richard:
While you succeed in conveying the main point of your article, there are traces of recklessness when you refer to the preferences given to certain groups. Yes, many schools seek diversity amongst their students, but you must qualify that statement to allow for the fact that some of the students who fall into the categories which receive preference are, in fact, fully worthy of attending their respective schools. As a student at an Ivy League university, I have oft heard from many of my African-American classmates of resentment at how it is assumed they were only admitted due to their race; how ironic it is that a policy designed to erase discrimination only allows for the generalization of all minority students needing extra help to be admitted, an assertion you support in your article. Likewise, although some legacies receive preference in admissions, it is also true that many may have been accepted without legacy status. In particular, as a male from North Dakota, I am deeply troubled by your insinuation that all North Dakotans receive admissions preference. I am not only offended on a personal level (my test scores, extracurricular successes, and academic quality during high school were far above the average admitted student) but also feel that your argument fails to consider that many students applying from North Dakota could fall into another category which receives preference, such as Native Americans. The manner in which the article is currently constructed creates a negative image of North Dakotans for all who read it. For example, if I met a professor who read your article, and I revealed that I was from North Dakota, the professor would instantly doubt my academic qualifications for attendance at my school, an inference directly linked to how you phrase your sentence. (”I don’t know whether to be amused or outraged by all the admissions preferences lavished on North Dakotans.”) If you are going to be regarded as a true expert on the subject, it is your responsibility to recognize the impact of your discourse on the lives of your subjects. A little nuance could go a long way towards rectifying many of my concerns; I hope in the future you consider the potentially unfair effect on those persons whom you write about, yet do not know individually.

John Kenney

From the Times of London:

From The Times December 4, 2009

Should boys and girls be taught together?
Joanna Sugden

Yes

Richard Cairns

Headmaster

Brighton College

I have worked in both single-sex and co-ed schools and have no doubt that both educationally and socially, co-educational schools are better for children. Education is not just about exams but about preparing them for adult life, and that includes working alongside the opposite sex.

I think I would be failing pupils if they went to university and were not prepared for the co-educational environment they found there. Single-sex schools simply do not prepare pupils properly for the world of work and university - for real life.

Read the rest of this entry »