The word is "sex," not "gender."

Sounds like Barak "Sweetie"
Obama's education policy.

Dana, LOL and new keyboard:

A new study to be released today on gender equity in education concludes that a "boys crisis" in U.S. schools is a myth and that both sexes have stayed the same or improved on standardized tests in the past decade.

The report by the nonprofit American Association of University Women, which promotes education and equity for women, reviewed nearly 40 years of data on achievement from fourth grade to college and for the first time analyzed gender differences within economic and ethnic categories.

Sorry, I think you're going to either have to redo this, or explain why this group's study has any more credibility than the tomacco industry's studies telling us that tomacco is good for our health.

In the meantime, I don't think anyone is surprised that rich kids get good education. It is sad :( that the AAUW and Tapped apparently think it's okay to ignore poor boys. (I guess it's their genetic destiny.)

The AAUW report is flawed. It's right on one count: for the most part, boys' and girls' achievement scores on national standardized tests are pretty similar, with a slight advantage for girls in reading and a slight advantage for boys in math.

But in everything that counts--actual high school and college performance--girls have the advantage, and that advantage has been growing. In terms of high school completion, high school GPA, college enrollment, college persistence, college completion, and early advanced degrees (e.g. master's), girls outperform boys. In advanced degrees (law degrees, Ph.D.s, etc.), men and women are even.

So when AAUW says there's no "crisis," what they're basing it on is the information they've chosen to emphasize--national surveys of achievement. Too bad employers actually look at things like degrees.

Looking at the above commenters, it's good to know that Christina Hoff Summers will never want for a credulous audience who want to be told that women are the ones who really have it easy.

Looking at T.Paine's fact free attack, it's good to see that Tapped will never lack for ignorant commenters who decry a call for rigor, fact and good scientific studies.

I don't know why T.Paine doesn't believe that women's studies should be subject to the same scientific rigor we require of all disciplines. Perhaps he/she thinks women can't cut it if we hold women's studies to the same standards.

I disagree.

Seems like an open and shut case.

Well, but no. My understanding is that it is a high-acheiving girl in the all-girls advanced class suing for access to a hypothetical advanced math class that is coeducational, not a discriminated-against boy suing for access to the actual all-girls advanced math class for which he is qualified. In other words, no one here has been arbitrarily denied access to an actual educational benefit; the girl here is receiving the best education possible and suing for the choice to be in a diverse classroom in spite of that. If this case is successful, then single-sex education is impossible because anyone can always claim they want students of the other sex in the classroom, regardless of the quality of the education they or others receive. This lawsuit is simply about using Title IX to destroy sex-role differentiation in public education, even if it promotes learning, the harmonious integration of the sexes, and benefits both sexes more than any reasonable alternative, and even if there is no clear proof that sex-role differentiation would be promoted by the single-sex program. Moreover, because there is no proof of injury to any party, the complaint is styled as a declaratory judgment. In essence, the ACLU is asking for an advisory opinion, which federal courts aren't supposed to give. I doubt it will be thrown out, though, as it technically dots all the i's and crosses all the t's.

The word is "sex," not "gender."

Actually, Dana uses both terms correctly:

Remember those experimental sex-segregated K-12 programs the New York Times Magazine profiled in March? You know, the ones that rely upon gender stereotypes to educate young public school students?

In the first sentence, she is describing the basis of the segregation, which is sex. Persons with penises go into one class, persons with vaginas go into another one.

In the second sentence, she is describing the stereotypes, which are based on gender, i.e., the social construction of "maleness" and "femaleness".

Seems to me she passed Feminist Studies 101.

From LOL: "I guess AAUW and Tapped think it's okay to ignore poor boys."

From the actual Post article, discussing what AAUW's research has found: "If there is a crisis, it is with African American and Hispanic students and low-income students, girls and boys."

I believe anyone who reads can see that what AAUW is saying is that rich white guys are outperforming women, still and always, as they always have been, despite the manufactured crisis that Hoff-Summers and her ilk manage to get certain among us to swallow; and that the children of the working and impoverished class, male and female both, are the ones at risk in our school system.

I don't get it...

Boys are improving, Girls improving faster = no crisis

Minorities improving, Whites improving faster = crisis

Standardized tests = bad, unreliable

Standardized tests = proof that boys and girls are close to equal

Grades = important for college

Grades = unimportant for measuring gender gap

As reported, the report itself seems truly idiotic.

In determining if there is a boy crisis or not,

"Perhaps the most compelling argument against a boys crisis is that men continue to outearn women in the workplace," the report says.

So all else being equal, until women outearn men, there can be no boy crisis.

Bwa ha ha ha ha!

Tomacco is good for you!

SRSLY, as a liberal and big fan of Robert Reich, all I can say is that CAP and TAPPED jumped the shark.

My two sons attended a private elementary school in Baltimore. The classes were divided by gender, but had some classes together.

This school has an incredible
history of success. My kids got an outstanding education.
The girls are all very successful.

I'll never regret sending them
there

This lawsuit is simply about using Title IX to destroy sex-role differentiation in public education, even if it promotes learning, the harmonious integration of the sexes, and benefits both sexes more than any reasonable alternative, and even if there is no clear proof that sex-role differentiation would be promoted by the single-sex program. Moreover, because there is no proof of injury to any party, the complaint is styled as a declaratory judgment. In essence, the ACLU is asking for an advisory opinion, which federal courts aren't supposed to give.