Thursday, April 22, 2010

Committee recommends closing Peabody

From the Tribune:


Questioner said...

A reason given for single gender academies is to give students the opportunities offered by Oakland and Central Catholic.

However, it seems that most new Catholic schools are not being designed as single gender. Based on history and tradition many existing single gender Catholic schools do remain single gender.

Anonymous said...

Aren't people sending their children to Oakland and Central Catholic, because they are Catholic schools? Isn't that a no-brainer?

Mark Rauterkus said...

I welcomed that statement about Central and Oakland Catholic from Mr. Lopez.


For years I've advocated for single gender OPTIONS so we'd have a PUBLIC Boys Campus and a different public girls high school.

My wish is still far from reality, but let the discussions begin.

My rant:

Mark Rauterkus said...

Not a no-brainer at all, IMNSHO.

Pittsburgh has Chatham Univ (all women undergrad) and NOT Catholic.

Pittsburgh has Ellis (all girls HS) and not Catholic.

I think many kids go to Oakland & Central -- as well as Ellis -- because of the single gender nature. It works for some.

Anonymous said...

So why are there no longer any non-Catholic boys schools?

Questioner said...

A single gender OPTION is OK.

But, with single gender classrooms already in place at Milliones, under the proposal if you are a student in the East End and you don't go to Allderdice or a magnet, you WILL be in a single gender classroom.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. Single sex should be a school of choice, not a school determined by residence.

Mark Rauterkus said...

Summit Academy is a boys only non Catholic school. So too is Kiski Prep.

Mark Rauterkus said...

Hence, we need to abolish all feeder patterns for high school aged kids in the City of Pittsburgh.

Get rid of the feeder patterns, first for high school aged kids. Nuke em.

Go to an ALL CHOICE model for every school: magnet, specialized, traditional, comprehensive, single-gender, whatever.

Anonymous said...

Kiski is a boarding school, and Summit academy is a boarding a school for adjudicated males, as a last resort. I wouldn't call them a school for the typical student.

Mark Rauterkus said...

Q: Why are there so FEW non-Catholic boys schools?

A1: American law has something to do with why. See the other thread on Title IX, for instance.

In New Zealand there are some all boys schools and all girl schools that are without a religious connection. Different laws.

I would never join an all men's country club. But likewise, I think it is hard to build two so that an equal club can be next door for the other gender.

A2: I think that the Catholic schools have done a good job at filling that limited need in various communities. And, mostly, these schools do NOT require students to be Catholic, generally.

"Typical students" isn't the aim with the creation these schools. PPS can be blessed with a range of options among comprehensive schools and specialized schools.

Typical urban public school results are not what we aspire to.

It might be nice to have other places and times in our lives when we (if we choose to do so) can gather among our buddies of the same gender -- beyond the prison system. Even with prisons, the element of a choice isn't always present.

Questioner said...

Separate but equal is not allowed when it comes to race; how is gender different?

Mark Rauterkus said...

Gender provides two options. Skin tone (race) distinctions amount to thousands.


Anonymous said...

What about gay, lesbian, transgender? Will these students be comfortable in single gender schools?

Mark Rauterkus said...

Hope so. Perhaps more so for some.

Questioner said...

It all goes to show how a particular gender based option may not fit everyone.