Are Single-Sex Schools Inherently Unequal?

Heise, Michael

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 102

First Page: 1219

Year: 2004

Bluebook Citation: 102 MICH. L. REV. 1219 (2004)

Author: Michael M. Heise: all 38 publications


Abstract

In chess, a "fork" occurs when a player, in a single move, attacks two or more of an opponent's pieces simultaneously, forcing a necessary choice between unappealing outcomes. Similar to the potentially devastating chess move, single-sex public schooling forks many constitutionalists and feminists. Constitutionalists are forced to reexamine the "separate but equal" doctrine's efficacy, this time through the prism of gender. Although the doctrine - forged in the crucible of race and overcome in the monumental triumph we know as Brown v. Board of Education - rested dormant for generations, persistent (and increasing) single-sex education options are forcing scholars to rethink long-held assumptions about how to breathe new life into the equal educational opportunity doctrine.

To some constitutionalists "separate" schools threaten to march girls back to the pre-Brown era and a gendered version of an educational Jim Crow. To others single-sex schools paradoxically enhance educational opportunity by affording more girls (or boys) the chance to achieve their full academic potential.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.