After reading the following, could you take a few minutes to answer the following 7 questions?  Your answers will be confidential, and only the statistical results of the survey will be posted at coeducat.htm for your review.   Thank you in advance for your concern:

1) Do you believe the US education system be fixed?


2) Do you believe it take even more money to fix it?


3) What other factors do you believe are behind the 3 decade 98 point drop in SAT scores?


4) Do you believe coeducation is part of the problem?


5) Do you believe the ban on school prayer part of the problem?


6) Do you believe systemic discrimination against boys is part of the problem?


7) What recommendations do you make for improving the education system?


In every way it can be measured, the federal government's 3 decade plus experiment with education has been a colossal failure. As the percent of coed schools increased from 38% to 83%, SAT scores dropped 98 points. Only one country ranks lower than the US on the math portion of the IAEP test. Up to 96% of the students in 2 countries which didn't participate in the test (Japan and Germany) take calculus in high school, while only 4% of our students do. We spend 3 to 10 times more as a percent of GDP than countries which now score 37% higher. Drug use is up, schools are virtual drug marketplaces, metal detectors are required to protect students from each other, we are now the world's largest incarcerator, schools teach that fathers are "abusers", while educators outright insult any taxpayer who sounds the alarm.

Educators say they need more money, and every time we give them more money, education quality ratchets down another notch. They say that "equal opportunity" requires them to abandon learning standards in favor of "raising self esteem", lowering motivation and ultimately the self esteem they thought they could push like you might try to push a string. They say we need "new math" to compensate for declining interest in math, and SAT scores drop even faster. They abandon phonics in favor of unproved teaching techniques and leave our youth without the ability to even read or write. They say they need more time off even though they can't explain how more time off would improve our youth's education. They say that the breakdown of the family is the only problem with education, while teaching students that "the traditional family is outmoded". Parents clamor for school vouchers to protect their children from being dumbed down but educators (in concert with courts who don't understand education) wage political campaigns on school property using our children as page boys to block parents' demands.

The US Department of Education noted: "In the assessment of the 13-year-old students in which 15 nations tested nationally representative populations, the average test scores of US students were higher than only one country, Jordan." Boy, I bet we knocked the socks off Jordan! So they sent a "team of bilingual experts" around the world to discover what everyone else is doing right, which returned with the message that "No single factor can be considered to influence student performance in isolation from other factors. There are no single answers to complex questions". This is slightly reminiscent of Hubert Humphrey's statement that "we can't look for easy solutions to hard questions", isn't it? These experts examined everything -- benefits and tenure, time in class, class size, additional duties of teachers, formal discussions between teachers, teachers' qualifications, diversity, and even discipline, -- except the pivotal advantage of single-sex education. They plodded through countries who spend one third as much as we do per student, past students who score 37% higher than ours, where boys and girls are sitting in separate classrooms, and failed to write down in their notebooks the relationship between single-sex education and high education performance.

Both boys and girls in single-sex schools in the US today outperform students in coed classes by wide margins. University School in Cincinnati, an all-boys school, has average SAT scores higher than every one of the 731 public schools in California. Catholic schools have most of the single-sex classes in the US, cost one third as much per student to operate ($2,000 per year per student compared to $6,000 per year per student for public schools), and produce students with 100 point higher SAT scores. Boys and girls in Korea and Japan, where there are mostly single-sex classes, score 37% & 43% higher, respectively. Three decades ago, before single-sex education was outlawed here, our students scored a full 19.5% higher than they do now. Our students of the 1960s may have scored higher then than some of the students in nations who score 37% higher today, because these nations made significant progress in education during the time that we dumbed it down.

David Murray, "Racial and Sexual Politics in Testing", ACADEMIC QUESTIONS, Pg. 10, describes how tests, test scores and standards have been politically manipulated to permit systemic discrimination against boys in our schools. He notes that even though boys score [18.6%] higher than girls in SAT Math, girls now constitute 55% of college admissions. Howard Wainer, Harvard Educational Review, Fall 1992, notes that males who get Ds and Fs in college math have average SAT Math scores higher than girls who get As and Bs. These articles mask the real tragedy of systemic bias against boys, because they don't address the state of denial that teachers are now in. Not a single educator interviewed, even those seriously concerned about this vital issue, would admit to participating in this bias, could explain how it happened, nor could offer a credible solution. If teachers won't face up to this problem, how are boys who are now being denied a proper education ever going to get one in this country?

It is bad enough that males represent less than their proportionate share of the population in college admissions.  It is worse to deny higher qualified boys admission to college in favor of less qualified girls, just because they are boys, (or as a "remedy for past discrimination" which may have been practiced by a 10 year old boy's great-grandfather). It is a prescription for social disaster. It demoralized boys. It gave girls a false and inflated sense of their abilities. It discredited our once fine universities. It provided graduates to industry who are not as qualified as they could and should have been. It damaged our economic competitiveness. It further increased the cost of education. It benefited only our "global competitors".

We cannot continue to ignore this evidence of education failure and the role played by systemic discrimination against boys. We cannot afford to pay for the future social and economic collapse without them. We OWE the boys of this nation the best education they can get, and they will never get it if we allow this dumbing down to continue. We can't afford that. It would be the greatest failure to the future of both boys and girls to permit this massive hemorrhaging of intelligence to continue, particularly when this social re-engineering, which denies all American students single-sex education, harms everyone. The evidence is clear that the intended beneficiaries -- minority groups -- fared even worse than non-minority groups did. For example, the percent of blacks who are incarcerated before the age of 32 increased from 22% to 75%, and the percent of black children with fathers in the home decreased from 75% to 22%.  Their poor education quality played a pivotal role in that family breakdown. As overall SAT scores plunged 98 points, the gap between males and females in SAT Math increased from 16.5% to 18.6%, a strong indication that dumbing down education benefited nobody. After more than 3 decades there is still not a shred of statistical evidence to suggest that any minority group at all benefited from this educational and social upheaval, and much to enable us to measure the damage.

I) DIRECT COST -- $251 Billion/year

How much does coeducation cost? The direct cost of education in the US is 5.8% of GDP, or $377 Billion. Japan, whose students score 43% higher than ours, spends one third as much per student and single-sex education is not only permitted, but is considered essential. If we followed a similar pattern we would be saving $251 Billion per year PLUS producing better students.

II) LOSS TO GDP -- $5,978 Billion/year

Students graduating today earn considerably less than their counterparts 3 decades with 98 point higher SAT scores did. How much less competitive is his employer when the quality of his work is impaired by a poor education? How much business does his employer's industry lose to Japan, where the workforce has even better math skills now than they did 3 decades ago? How much does GDP decrease for each one point decrease in SAT scores? Without showing the elaborate calculations (which are available upon request) GDP in the US is suppressed by $61 Billion for each 1 point decline in SAT scores. A 98 point drop in SAT scores costs us $5,978 Billion each year in reduced GDP.

III) SOCIAL COST -- $270 Billion/year

The long term social costs are more difficult to quantify, but are obviously expensive. The relationship between poor education quality, family breakdown, and crime is a constant. If the incarceration rate were to continue to increase at the rate it did in the last 3 decades (during which time it quadrupled) more than 24% of GDP would be required within 2 decades just to operate our jails and prisons. That cost will collide with a number of other costs and cause economic chaos. For simplicity, those future and inevitable costs will be ignored, and it will be assumed that functional education would have prevented or at least limited family breakdown enough to constrain crime to its 1960s level, saving 75% of our current $360 Billion justice system cost, or $270 Billion per year.

Direct Cost $251 Billion per year
Loss to GDP $5,978 Billion per year
Social Cost $270 Billion per year
Total Cost $6,499 Billion per year

This number could be low. Or it could be inflated by 10 times. Or you could argue that the transition to coeducation in the US was responsible for only one third of this extra cost of education, and not the entire $6.5 Trillion. You could say that the school system itself is not at all responsible for family breakdown, that some other unidentified factor was, assign two thirds of this $6.5 Trillion figure to that unidentified factor, and still have a potential $2.1 Trillion reason to establish single-sex education. You could argue that it was banning prayer in school which led to this colossal failure of US education, and not coeducation.

Can you say that the experiment has been a success?