SANFORD, Maine — The school committee remains firm in their belief that offering single-gender classes to some elementary school students is in their best interests but voted to halt the classes Monday because of a litigation threat by the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine.
“We find it regrettable that the ACLU, fueled by inaccurate assumptions about our voluntary program and the level of understanding of student learning, has chosen to elevate ideology over the needs of individual students,” the school committee said in a statement read by Chairman Don Jamison Monday night. “However, we are mindful the mission of the Sanford School Department is to educate, not litigate. Accordingly, we have decided to suspend the program indefinitely.
“In doing so, we stress that our decision is based solely on our desire to protect our community from the stress of litigation and should not in any way be construed as our agreement with the ACLU’s position or that our voluntary program violated any laws. We encourage the ACLU to put aside its own biases and look more closely at the specifics of our program and the benefits it has produced for our students as individuals.”
The ACLU of Maine alleged May 21 the decision by the school committee to institute one single-gender class for girls and another for boys in fifth and sixth grade at Willard School was based on what they described as harmful gender stereotypes and that it contravened federal law.
“Sex segregation in public schools is not only illegal, but also unfair to both male and female students,” said Zachary Heiden, legal director of the ACLU of Maine Foundation, in a written statement May 21. “Gender stereotypes are no basis for sound constitutional education policy.”
In a statement, the ACLU said it would consider further action, including filing lawsuits and administrative complaints with state and federal agencies if the classes in Sanford and in other states weren’t ended, as part of its “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” campaign. The ACLU of Maine said an investigation they conducted showed single-gender programs at Willard School were based on disputed theories that suggest that boys and girls learn so differently that they need to be educated separately.
The school committee instituted two single-gender classrooms in 2009 for sixth-grade students as an option. They proved so popular, the program was expanded in 2011 to include one fifth-grade class of girls and another of boys.
The four members of the school committee present at Monday’s meeting voted unanimously to suspend the program. Member Adam Cote was away on military duty.
“I think it’s sad someone thinks they can take it away from us, and I resent it,” said school committee member Marguerite Herlihy.
Willard School teacher Barbara Noone said she appreciated the opportunity to have taught one of the classes for the past three years.
“I don’t know how the ACLU got into the education field,” said Noone, a teacher for 20 years. She said the 75 students who participated in the program, “are not the same; they’re different.
“For some, it was a gift.”
Madison McFarland, an eighth-grade student at Sanford Junior High School who took part in a single-gender class at Willard School, wrote a letter to the school committee that she forwarded to some news organizations.
“The single-gender classes build confidence,” wrote McFarland. She said other students told her there was no peer pressure in a single-gender classroom, students were more comfortable and felt they could be heard.
“Willard School may be a public school, but who is to say that public schools can’t get creative with education,” McFarland wrote. “The only stereotype is the ACLU’s stereotype that single-gendered classes are a negative idea.”
Willard School has six fifth-grade classes and six sixth-grade classes.
The school committee said many of the students whose families exercised the single-gender option “thrived in ways they could not have in a more traditional classroom setting.”
“We did make a difference for some kids,” said Superintendent David Theoharides.
To see more from the Journal Tribune visit journaltribune.com
ACLU strikes again….the accounts and explanations presented by the school state that this program is voluntary and an optional choice for students….the program has “proved to be popular” to the extent that it needed to be expanded…..sort of seems ironic that an organization that claims it is our nation’s “guardian” to defend and preserve “individual rights” would oppose and threaten litigation over a program where participation is based specifically on individual choice……Crazy…..
Actually the school committee knuckled under.
The school committee made a decision after being threatened with litigation by the ACLU of Maine…..
“She said the 75 students who participated in the program, “are not the same; they’re different.”
And there’s the crux of it. The ACLU, hoisting its progressive banner high, is horrified at the thought that humans should be recognized as individuals and not just interchangeable parts in their great collectivist blob.
Who cares that the program has demonstrated that it’s been effective and expanded it to build on its success? Who cares that the school would be forced to expend precious time and money defending itself against their frivolous lawsuit? Who cares that participation in the single-gender classes was voluntary?
The ACLU should hang its head in shame.
But I think that is their point. If all children are different, then why group them in this specific way? You’re still going to have a diverse bunch of girls and a diverse bunch of boys, so what help is it to seperate them? There are studies that show adults underestimate the abilities of young girls and are more likely to coddle them, subconciously of course. They did this by monitering when adults would intervene with children playing. I think that is a valid thing to be concerned about.
Sounds like you weren’t listening. This was an OPTION for those students and parents who felt they would benefit from it. It had proven to be successful for its participants. There is no forced discrimination involved – just a school offering an option and people exercising their choice.
ACLU is simply furthering the socialist agenda that wverybody in the state must be educated the same. That diversity (except for the type they define) must be eliminated. That freedom must be expunged and the collective be exalted for the good of the state. Where’s the loud funny looking man with the moustache?
Thankfully there is still the option of home education!
Has nothing to do with socialism. That’s ridiculous.
Oh really, have the you seen what the President has done lately? Which the ACLU supports!
Zzzzzzzz, still haven’t explain how that has anything to do with socialism.
Such crazy links people make…
The program was successful and participation was voluntary.
No one’s rights were being violated. The only thing this lawsuit accomplished was giving some collectivist legal apparatchik at the ACLU something to do to enhance his or her resume.
So why are you replying to me? I didn’t deny the program was voluntary. I just wanted to point out that I think both sides have valid stances.
Is a voluntary whites-only public school program okay if it’s not compulsory?
There’s a boys-only class.
At the same time, there’s a girls-only class.
And right along with these two, there are classes with both boys and girls.
Your question is nonsense.
It’d be nice to get an answer nonetheless.
It’d be nice to get an answer nonetheless.
Thanks liberals. This has to do with education, and not descrimination.
I wonder if they’re going to start suing single gender schools.
all girls schools or all boys schools will be a thing of the past.
and religous schools will soon go too when the libs start to sue them for discrimination.
america is going down the drain because of stuff like this.
Apparently it’s not longer politically correct to have your own unique identity,
unless of course you’re a minority or special interest organization or religion.
All boys and girls schools are private. There in lies the difference.
Once again the stupidity of the ACLU is showing. Never mind that this policy might actually be of help to the students.
The legal leg the ACLU was standing on was the fact that separate but equal is illegal, but this was voluntary not mandatory so what is the big deal?
That doesn’t matter. The law is easily ignored when it’s convenient. Why NOT perpetuate the stereotype that girls aren’t smart enough to learn if there are boys around or that boys can’t focus because there are girls in the classroom.
How the hell did WE do it? Is coddling the children the way to teach them?
So, as long as it helps it doesn’t matter if it’s unconstitutional?
The ACLU asserts that it’s unconstitutional. That would have to be determined in a court of law.
This is typical of ACLU lawfare. They bring pressure of lawsuits on groups that they see as ideologically unaligned with their agenda in the hope that the party they’re trying to injure will be unable to afford to fight their suit. Naturally, the school would fall into this category. Pretty slimy stuff.
Well done ACLU!
Next target: single-gender bathrooms.
Just why DO we have single gender bathrooms?
Sex, modesty, and other old fashioned ideas. Don’t worry, we’ll get over it with the ACLU’s help.
In the meantime, we can turn to the problem of gender-specific pronouns.
I didn’t know I was worrying about it. In fact, I didn’t even bring up single-gendered bathrooms.
I do worry that because some people think something is a good idea it shouldn’t matter if that idea doesn’t pass constitutional muster. The individual mandate in the current national health-care law SOUNDS like a good idea, but is it legal to force a person to purchase a product simply for existing as an American citizen?
The article states that the classes built confidence, but did they build confidence to deal with members of the opposite sex? I think it’s an issue that needs to be explored if the program is, in fact, “based on what they described as harmful gender stereotypes and that it contravened federal law” as stated by the ACLU. In any case, is this “problem” of girls and boys learning so differently an issue in a classroom with an attentive and concerned teacher? Before you jump all over me, understand that I went to public schools and I have been in classes with teachers that teach well and teachers that do not. Is it possible that boys and girls can learn together, cooperate, and STILL do their best? Or must they be taught that boys and girls are so fundamentally different that they cannot.
Then why the hell did you ask me about them?
First, I didn’t ask YOU about them-I asked whoever was reading.
Second, you mentioned it so I thought it was an interesting topic in relation to the article so I continued it.
Third, why the hostility, brah?
To avoid confusion, then, the next time you want to ask whoever is reading, don’t do it by replying to one of my comments.
What’s the problem? You mentioned single gendered bathrooms and I went with it. I’m sorry, but I hadn’t read that rule you mention. Please forgive my ignorance.
Go Redskins!
When the progressive liberal parents of little johnny have to decide which class little johnny felt comfortable in. It is time to sue.
Does the ACLU pay any taxes that support the school? Why have a school board? Why doesn’t the ACLU run the school? It sounds like it already does run the school.