Anecdotal and Essentialist Arguments for Single-Sex Educational Programs Discussed by Liben: a Legal Analysis

Anecdotal and Essentialist Arguments for Single-Sex Educational Programs Discussed by Liben: a... This commentary responds to Liben’s (2015) “Probability Values and Human Values in Evaluating Single-Sex Education” by analyzing the values she discusses through a legal framework. As Liben correctly points out, many single-sex education programs are animated by claims regarding “hard wired” biological sex difference, and proponents tend to value personal experience and anecdote over scientific approaches to data. This commentary recognizes the contribution Liben makes in situating supporters of single-sex education within a particular historical tradition and illuminating their values. However, it argues that while gender essentialism and resulting claims regarding typical male and female tendencies may be established intellectual philosophies, they are of limited value from a practical legal perspective. Similarly, while anecdotes and personal experience have real power, they are legally insufficient to support sex-based classifications enshrined by public schools. The commentary builds on the link Liben has drawn between historical gender essentialist views surrounding women’s education and contemporary proponents of single-sex education by providing examples of how these views are currently being applied in classrooms across the U.S. It then provides a discussion of the development of sex-discrimination law, demonstrating how historical examples of gender essentialism in law were ultimately rejected by the courts. Through a discussion of the legal requirements governing single-sex education, the commentary attempts to illustrate the relevance of both evidence and gender-essentialism in legal determinations about the permissibility of single-sex education programs in the United States. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Sex Roles Springer Journals

Anecdotal and Essentialist Arguments for Single-Sex Educational Programs Discussed by Liben: a Legal Analysis

Sex Roles , Volume 72 (10) – May 17, 2015
Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/anecdotal-and-essentialist-arguments-for-single-sex-educational-S0ij1jYBgt
Publisher
Springer US
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Springer Science+Business Media New York
Subject
Psychology; Gender Studies; Sociology, general; Medicine/Public Health, general
ISSN
0360-0025
eISSN
1573-2762
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11199-015-0478-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This commentary responds to Liben’s (2015) “Probability Values and Human Values in Evaluating Single-Sex Education” by analyzing the values she discusses through a legal framework. As Liben correctly points out, many single-sex education programs are animated by claims regarding “hard wired” biological sex difference, and proponents tend to value personal experience and anecdote over scientific approaches to data. This commentary recognizes the contribution Liben makes in situating supporters of single-sex education within a particular historical tradition and illuminating their values. However, it argues that while gender essentialism and resulting claims regarding typical male and female tendencies may be established intellectual philosophies, they are of limited value from a practical legal perspective. Similarly, while anecdotes and personal experience have real power, they are legally insufficient to support sex-based classifications enshrined by public schools. The commentary builds on the link Liben has drawn between historical gender essentialist views surrounding women’s education and contemporary proponents of single-sex education by providing examples of how these views are currently being applied in classrooms across the U.S. It then provides a discussion of the development of sex-discrimination law, demonstrating how historical examples of gender essentialism in law were ultimately rejected by the courts. Through a discussion of the legal requirements governing single-sex education, the commentary attempts to illustrate the relevance of both evidence and gender-essentialism in legal determinations about the permissibility of single-sex education programs in the United States.

Journal

Sex RolesSpringer Journals

Published: May 17, 2015

References

  • Single-sex education: New perspectives and evidence on a continuing controversy
    Bigler, RS; Signorella, ML

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off