Little Evidence of Academic Advantages
Title IX of the U.S. Education Amendments
of 1972 outlawed discrimination on the basis
of sex in educational programs receiving fed-
eral funds. Admissions policies of SS primary
and secondary schools were exempt, but reg-
ulation prohibited virtually all SS classes in
coeducational schools. In 2006, U.S. Depart-
ment of Education regulations reinterpreted
Title IX to permit SS classes within coedu-
cational schools under limited circumstances,
including a requirement that the SS nature
of the class be "substantially related to the
achievement of an important governmental or
educational objective (1).
From a policy perspective, implementa-
tion of SS schooling should stand on evidence
that it produces better educational outcomes
than coeducational schooling. But such evi-
dence is lacking. A review (2) commissioned
by the U.S. Department of Education itself
to compare SS and coeducational outcomes
concluded: "As in previous reviews, the
results are equivocal." Large-scale reviews
in Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New
Zealand, as well as analyses of data from the
Programme for International Student Assess-
ment, similarly found little overall difference
between SS and mixed-sex academic out-
comes (3-7).
appear promising, apparent advantages dis-
solve when outcomes are corrected for pre-
existing differences (3-6). Students enter-
ing SS schools are often academically more
advanced. For example, students at a pub-
lie middle school in the Southwest United
States boast higher test scores than most
students in their district. But they had sig-
nificantly higher test scores in the year
before admission than girls who applied but
were not admitted, although admission was
reported to be a lottery, and their subsequent
achievement was no better than that of stu-
dents in a coeducational program with simi-
lar entry-level scores (8).
In addition, underperforming children in
SS schools often transfer out prematurely,
which inflates final performance outcomes.
An example is Chicago's Urban Prep Char-
ter Academy for Young Men, a school whose
high college admission rates have led to
its praise as a success story for SS educa-
tion (9). However, when graduation rates at
Urban Prep (10) and similar schools (11) are
computed relative to freshman enrollment,
they are comparable to those of other area
public schools.
A new curriculum, like a new drug or
factory production method, often yields a
short-term gain because people are moti-
ce that their suc
cess stems from their SS organization, a
opposed to the quality of the student body
demanding curricula, and many other fea
tures also known to promote achievement
coeducational schools.
No Evidence from Brain Research
"Brain researchers have proven that boy:
learn differently than girls," said a teacher
in a SS public-school classroom (14). This
statement reflects misinformation about neu-
robehavioral science. Neuroscientists have
found few sex differences in children's brains
beyond the larger volume of boys' brains and
the earlier completion of girls' brain growth,
neither of which is known to relate to learn-
ing (15). In adults, certain sex differences
have been reported (e.g., in brain activation
patterns, auditory thresholds, memory per-
formance) (16-18), but none are substantial
enough to justify different educational meth-
ods. Moreover, sex differences in adult brains -
Sex differences in adults' neural structure or
cannot be assumed to be mirrored in children.
function may result from a lifetime of sex-
differentiated experiences rather than "hard-
wiring" (17).
But this is not what educators, parents,
and school boards hear about brain-related
sex differences. In an article in a teachers'
