School X; gender segregation; sex segregation; Ofsted and the High Court

[OlennasWimple]

Thought this case might be of interest here. From the link:

School X – a co-educational, Muslim voluntary aided school in the UK – segregates its pupils based on their gender. From the age of 9 to 16, Muslim boys and girls are segregated for everything – during lessons and all breaks, activities and school trips.

On 13 and 14 June 2016, the school was inspected by the regulatory body, Ofsted, which raised concerns about a number of leadership failings including those involving gender segregation, the absence of effective safeguarding procedures, and an unchallenged culture of gender stereotyping and homophobia. Offensive religious books promoting rape, violence against women and misogyny were discovered in the school library. Some girls also complained anonymously that gender segregation did not prepare them for social interaction and integration into the wider society. As a result of what it found during the inspection, Ofsted judged the school to be inadequate and placed it in special measures.

The school took legal action to stop Ofsted from publishing its report. They argued that, amongst other things, the report was biased and that gender segregation does not amount to sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.

On 8 November 2016, following a High Court hearing, the presiding judge, Mr Justice Jay, found that there was no sex discrimination because of his reading of the law and the lack of evidence before him. He found that gender segregation did not amount to sex discrimination since both boys and girls were ‘separated equally’. He noted that although women hold minority power in society generally, there was no evidence before him that girls suffered specifically as a result of the segregation in this school. Mr Justice Jay noted the differences between segregation on the grounds of race in the USA and South Africa in previous decades and gender segregation in the UK today, concluding that he had not heard evidence that gender segregation made girls feel disadvantaged or inferior.

*Ofsted appealed against the ruling of the High Court which will be heard at the Court of Appeal on 11 and 12 July 2017.^

He noted that although women hold minority power in society generally, there was no evidence before him that girls suffered specifically as a result of the segregation in this school.

www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/x-v-oftsed-press-summary.pdf

From (6) onwards- It's too long to copy/paste and I have yet to read the full judgement but it seems like OFSTED may have made a pretty shitty case here given that this particular argument (as the judge explains it) it extremely problematic.

Just reading the full ruling and I am on the side of the judge so far. I cant finish reading it right now but just want to post first thoughts (and hope the remaining part doesn't contridict them).

www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/x-v-ofsted.pdf

OFSTED have been incredibly fucking unprofessional. They started with the idea that "gender segregation" in of its self must be discriminatory then worked backwards to figure out why. As the judge points out they even misquote the Equality Act (using gender instead of sex).

Although the school raised a number of issues the only one the court found in favour of was the "sex segregation always equals sex discrimination", for obvious reasons I completely agree with the judge.

OFSTED themselves note in emails that they found no difference in the quality of education offered even though they were actively looking for it.

The school may be fucking terrible, I haven't read anything about the books in the library etc. As I understand it if the court upholds then it just means they have to take that part out of the report, the rest will still stand.

If OFSTED genuinely think this then there are a lot of currently outstanding schools that are in big trouble. Single sex schools are not limited to 'religious' schools.
The culture of homophobia and the books in the library are another thing entirely.

Single sex education can have lots of benefits for girls in my experience - lots of confidence in maths and science, plus lots of 'girl power' feelings that they can do anything. Segregation alone is not necessarily a problem. Many parents and children actively choose single sex education. The way the school appear to favour boys and use it to enforce gender stereotypes is not acceptable.

Might this see OFSTED and other government organisations using the word sex rather than gender in future rather than conflating the two?

No surprise with OFSTED finding facts to fit their ideas.

If Ofsted don't want sex segregated schools or schools where libraries contain misogynistic religious books (which is pretty much all of them) then there needs to be a big conversation about allowing religious schooling at all.

If the girls and boys had different lessons, if the girls were routinely expected to be meek and the boys allowed to be bullies, then that would be in Ofsted's report.

Instead they appear to have decided they don't like the ethos of the school and tried to compile a list of reasons why. I personally would be all for secular, integrated schooling (with sex segregated options still available) but this seems like a vendetta.

Ofsted actually say that gender segregation (their phrase) only needs to be educationally justified in mixed sex schools which makes no sense at all.

School X – a co-educational, Muslim voluntary aided school in the UK – segregates its pupils based on their gender. From the age of 9 to 16, Muslim boys and girls are segregated for everything – during lessons and all breaks, activities and school trips

I am generally not in favour of single sex education and resolutely opposed to faith schools of any kind. The idea of a purportedly co-educational school segregating children in this way seems utterly wrong.

shouldwest - this isn't a single sex school, it's a co-ed school where the boys and girls are separated.

But it looks like (and thanks for posting the link to the judgment) that Ofsted have primarily fucked up by conflating gender and sex...

Going against the general opinion here, I do think that the segregation within the same school could be a problem.

The traditional British way to do things is, for all I know, to have girl schools and boy schools.

Teachers have been observed to prioritize boys in coeducated schools where there are girls and boys in the same class.
What if they also prioritize boys when the lessons are segregated?

I mean, in an all-girls school, the teachers would either have a favourite student who is a girl, or none at all. If they want to talk to students about something they find fascinating about the subject they teach, they have to talk to girls. All the energy invested into preparing lessons is for the benefit of girls.

I do suspect that if they are teaching three lessons for girls and three lessons for boys in the same day, and are culturally primed to be sexist already, then it is likely that the teachers would, even subconsciously, put less effort into teaching the girls.

PE at our state comprehensive school is split by sex. (Boys and girls do PE with children of the same sex.)

I thought that there were scientific studies that suggest that girls are more academically successful in single sex classes - especially STEM?

Segregation per se is not the problem. A friend of mine went to a school were the boys and girls were educated separately until they were in the Sixth Form. She loved it - they got to mix at break and lunch but the girls got the benefit of boy-free lessons. I've also known comprehensive teach boys and girls separately.

OFSTED have not covered themselves with glory here.

If Ofsted don't want sex segregated schools or schools where libraries contain misogynistic religious books (which is pretty much all of them) then there needs to be a big conversation about allowing religious schooling at all.

It is a complicated subject. I went to a "religious" private school in Germany, and the only religious thing about it was that year 5 students were required to go to church once a week, to listen to someone preaching about loving your neighbour and similar stuff. Can't recall any sexism.

We also didn't have the option to choose the subject ethics instead of religion, but that was about it with nods to the religious tradition of the school.

In Germany, Christianity is ... domesticated, for lack of a better word. It does not always mean worse-than-average sexism, not nearly in the way it does for example in the US.

Islam, on the other hand ... is not. It was probably on the way to being a tame, peaceful religion in some of the countries where it is traditional, before wars gave rise to extremism, but in traditionally Christian countries, a Muslim school is a very different animal from a (traditional) Christian school.

(Newly founded schools that are all about Christianity I would eye with suspicion, too.)

Not sure I'd be in favour of a blanket ban on all schools that have anything to do with religion, though the school I went to might just decide to go with it and make the (small in that case) changes required.

Going against the general opinion here, I do think that the segregation within the same school could be a problem

I agree Vestal

I can't recall my teachers prioritising boys over girls in the 1970s- prioritisation was very obviously given to the tiny proportion of academically inclined destined for university. My school had strict streaming for individual subjects within each year. Because of its size English and maths had as many as 5 or 6 classes in any one year segregated on ability. The English1 or Maths1 class were always taught by the heads of department (in itself I suppose unfair as the brightest children were allocated to the most experienced teachers). I wonder if that would happen for the boys' classes?

She loved it - they got to mix at break and lunch but the girls got the benefit of boy-free lessons

But this school does not allow that.

PE at our state comprehensive school is split by sex. (Boys and girls do PE with children of the same sex.)

Isn't that the norm other than junior primary? It isn't comparable - given physical and biological differences it makes sense to segregate for PE.

Lumela - I agree that Ofsted havent' covered themselves in glory, but what has happened at this school is not what happened at your friend's. The girls and boys aren't allowed to mix at all, even to walk down the same corridor as each other.

The question arises for me as to why they don't in fact set up two separate schools (probably because it is a VA school and it's near impossible to set up a new one of those now?). But single sex schools are often judged by Ofsted on the opportunities that they give for their students to spend time with the opposite sex, eg joint drama productions with the single sex school down the road. This school was purposefully keeping girls and boys segregated at all times

PE being split by sex is a permittable exception: the law (and Ofsted's inspection framework) is very clear that where there is an educational reason to do so, it's OK to teach girls and boys separately.

So - off the top of my head - it's OK to have PE separately due to both physical differences, particularly for contact sport, and differences in sports played by girls and boys. It's OK to teach some PSHE lessons separately, as girls will learn about periods and unwanted pregnancy better without the boys there, and boys will learn about wet dreams and shaving better without the girls there. Teaching core subjects like English and Maths separately may also lead to better outcomes.

The question for me that isn't covered in the judgment is whether boys and girls do in fact have similar outcomes: are the exams results roughly comparable? Do they go onto similar further education destinations?

Olenna

I know nothing about Ofsted so am going soley by the judgment but Ofsted don't actually have a consistant framework for this which is part of the problem. This case will determine what that framework will be going forward.

Your second question is interesting, it's noted various times throughout the judgement that Ofsted offer no evidence of difference in quality of education. Do they measure difference in educational attainment between the sexes at all? I would hope so but I have no idea. If they do I can only imagine that the schools results are similar to national results. If they don't measure this it's a fucking scandal.

Another thing that really bothers me about this is why this only applies to mixed schools. I know the fact that it's a faith school is a large part of this (indeed all mixed schools that practice sex segregation seem to be faith schools) but in my wider area (my town having only mixed schools) there are a few of same sex schools that are faith schools. Presumably they are able to do this because the religions in question (CoE and Catholic) attract enough pupils to justify two sites. It just seems incredibly arbitrary to judge this on whether it's practiced over one or two sites.

Of course I think we shouldn't have faith schools at all but that's probably another thread.

Ofsted are supposed to examine the attainment data (and probe the leadership team's understanding of the attainment data, and what they are doing to rectify any shortcomings and monitor emerging trends) as part of any inspection.

Single sex schools are judged - like all schools - on how they prepare their students for life in modern Britain, and are expected to demonstrate how they engage in wider society including members of the opposite sex. Often single sex schools have formal or informal "twinning" type arrangements where they do activities together, such as a drama production each year, or have a shared orchestra etc. I find it hard to believe that any school that doesn't allow girls and boys to mix in school would be doing this sort of thing. I also wonder what chaperoning arrangements they put in place for the girls when they went on school trips, and how these compared to the boys.

I find it hard to believe that any school that doesn't allow girls and boys to mix in school would be doing this sort of thing.

I agree. Also perhaps the court should focus a bit on Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (the case that outlawed school racial segregation in the US), if they are going to differentiate this school situation from racial segregation in the US. It's the context of separation that is the crux of the matter. Essentially, Brown said that in a society where black people are considered inferior, separate can never be equal. So the question in my mind is what is the reason for the segregation of the sexes? Is it to empower girls? Or is to promote a patriarchal and potentially oppressive ethos?