History
In the late-sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, most New England towns required teachers to be paid to instruct all of the town's children. However, as a law passed by the town of Farmington Connecticut demonstrates, this did not ensure that every child received a free education. Farmington had made a by-law stating that when the words "all children" were used, they only referred to male children (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 18). In 1853, Horace Mann pointed out , "In the early history of Massachusetts, and long after provisions for Public Free Schools had been made, it was a common thing for boys only to attend them," (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 13). In the seventeenth century, the main purpose of school was to prepare the child for a college education, or to become either a minister or a politician. Therefore, because those careers were not open to women, it was not thought necessary to educate girls beyond a rudimentary level. Girls received just enough knowledge to read the Bible, either from their parents, or from a Dame School, for a small fee.
It was not until the eighteenth-century that girls really entered the "public school." Girls attended summer schools taught by women. Because the school house was free during the summer, and the female teachers were not paid very much, the girls were allowed to receive a free education. This opportunity for female teachers to teach children in a more public setting unlocked the door for future changes.
By 1789, Massachusetts required both school mistresses and masters to be certified, which finally recognized women as formal teachers (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 21). This recognition also legitimized a girlÕs desire to seek an education. After all, she could now turn her education into a career.
Although educational opportunities were opening up, only girls from wealthy families were able to receive an education. However, after the American Revolution, a stronger effort was made to educate a larger percentage of girls. Reformers argued that women deserved schooling as a matter of individual rights (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 26). As Norton states, "Only during the post war years did American women begin to argue systematically that members of their sex should be better educated." (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 27).
A change in the status quo was not welcomed by everyone. Educating girls to the same level as boys threatened the idea of separate cultures and economic spheres for men and women. It was believed that if women were educated like men, it would undermine the institution of marriage, as well as weaken the education of men (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 30).
Even with opposition, it was recognized that in order to build a new Republic, it would be necessary for women to be educated, if only to educate the future generations. Therefore, women's education was no longer used just for Bible reading. Women needed to understand a new government in order to develop into, and to raise their children to be republican citizens. The roles of women had changed. They were no longer thought of as "the sentimental and dependent maiden", but rather the competent, devout, principled woman, a fit companion for her husband and skilled nurturer and teacher of her children," (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 38).
By the 1830s, women authors were being published in magazines that reached large numbers of people, thus bringing their new ideas into the mainstream. During this same period, a number of all girls schools opened, showing that if in the past women's education had been superficial, that was no longer the case. (Single Sex Education) Women were finally being viewed as mentally equal to men. The opening of these private schools for women forced public schools to recognize, to some degree, the abilities of women. In fact, women were being taken seriously enough that in 1840, Emma Willard, was elected the superintendent of the Kensington area schools. However, such leaps forward were very closely watched , and were only really allowed in areas that were still within the realm of "femininity." This can be seen by the changes that Willard made while in office. Instead of changing the curriculum, she started associations such as the Female Association, which made certain that classrooms were well equipped and that all children attended school. Willard even maintained the separate spheres of men and women at the Teachers' Institute in Oneida County, by making certain that men were still in command, and women stayed "modest and unassuming"(Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 44).
In the early twentieth-century, the debate over coeducation had not subsided. As Clarke, the President of Harvard, and a leader of the opposition to coeducation, stated, "We should cultivate the differences of the sexes, not try to hide or abolish it." In 1874, he even presented a "scientific argument" why coeducation should not exist to the National Education Association (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 150). He argued that there were "fundamental physiological differences" between young women and men. He stated that if blood was channeled to the brain, it would be unavailable to help women generate their reproductive organs. Therefore, it would be harmful for them to continue on to higher education (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 150).
Another debate about coeducation in high schools was also raging: there were concerns that boys would be harmed by coeducation, because they would not get the education necessary to prepare them for the labor market if females were allowed in their high schools. The argument of how boys were being cheated appeared in The Saturday Evening Post in 1912. It stated that the high school was designed for "socially and mentally homogeneous sons of American parents," but the pupils were actually " as heterogeneous as an election day crowd," (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 166). Many argued that in single sex schools, masters could keep the students focused and eager to learn, but once they entered a coeducational school, students earned low marks and became puzzled until the point of loosing their self-esteem and dropping out of school (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 166). While this argument has a familiar ring to it, the reasons for such claims also parallel todayÕs discussions of how girls are being cheated by schools. Many thought that schools must have been cheating boys because girls were getting higher grades than boys. In 1910, a principle from Chicago stated, "The valedictorians of high school graduating classes are almost always girls" (Tyack & Hansot, 1990, 166). This did not sit well with many who still believed the main propose of females was to raise children, while males needed education to go to college and to learn skills for their future careers.
By the turn of the century, researchers and educators had compiled evidence that students should be tracked by ability, because some were more "hand-minded" then others. While this was intended to create a vocational track for boys, the idea was also used to separate boys and girls in academic courses. The rationale behind this argument was that just as vocational schools separated out those who were headed for more hands-on jobs, women and men were headed for different careers , so they too should be separated. During this Progressive Era, the idea of "one size fits all" was thought too rigid. Many felt that schools should respond to the differences among people and offer different opportunities. In order to determine differences in abilities, intelligence tests were used. Elective courses, such as home economics for girls and shop for boys, were also developed. All of these reforms encouraged and produced segregation of the student body, which was not challenged legally until Sweatt v. Painter in 1950. In 1954, the Supreme Court set a precedent in the case, Brown v. Board of Education, by stating that "separate but equal" education was not actually equal. It stated that segregation went against the Fourteenth Amendment, and that integration was necessary for equal education (Pulliam & Van Patten, 1995). Following Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 granted everyone the right to an equal opportunity to be educated. It specified that "no person could be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin in an program which received federal assistance" (Pulliam and Van Patten, 1995). This included schools.
Since the 1950s and 60s, many more changes have followed, such as the appointment of a National Advisory Council on Women's Educational Programs (NACWEP) in 1974, under Title IX, Part C ,Section 936 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This legislation also created the WomenÕs Educational Equity Act (WEEA) Program, which funds the development of programs and projects for women throughout the nation. While these acts showed a step in the right direction, the NACWEP was terminated in 1988. While some would interpret this to mean that the gender gaps have been addressed and "solved", many recent studies have shown that women are still being cheated by our schools. These studies show that gender biases are running rampant in American classrooms. Therefore, girls are not getting an equal opportunity to learn.
Government 375: Educational Reform and Ideology