Two of my sisters followed in the footsteps of two of our aunts and became school teachers. One went the traditional route of college right after high school. The other got married after high school, but decided to go to college and become a teacher when her youngest child turned 15. She has been teaching for 24 years now, and spends her summers teaching in a program called Girls Inc. The program, for girls 6-18, is designed to help them become “strong, smart and bold.” They study math, science, economics (including home economics) and foreign languages. They work to improve their reading skills. This is in Alabama, a state the rest of the country often finds good reason to deride.

Here in the nation’s capital, girls would not be even an afterthought were it not for the city being threatened with a lawsuit for ignoring them. A year-and-a-half ago, the schools’ chancellor said $20 million is to be invested in education initiatives for black and Hispanic boys, the highlight being an all-boys college preparatory high school to be located in an area with the city’s lowest incomes and highest crime rate. The possible suit may come from the American Civil Liberties Union, which studied the matter and determined that leaving black and Hispanic girls out of the picture violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The most damning thing about the controversy is that the the city’s own statistics make the case against its plans.

Numbers only lie when made to do so. The statistics provided in the ACLU report tell a truth: black and Hispanic girls are in as much need of help as their male counterparts. The unique struggles of girls have been known for some time. Some of that knowledge was gleaned from research conducted and published more than two decades ago right here. In Failing in Fairness: How America’s Schools Cheat Girls, the late Myra Sadker and her husband David Sadker – both professors at American University in 1993 – discuss the results of  three years of observations made in elementary schools in four states and the District of Columbia.

What was learned was striking. As the National Education Association reports, “Boys called out eight times as often as girls did. When a boy yelled out, the teacher ignored the ‘raise your hand‘ rule and usually praised his contribution. Girls who called out got reminders to raise their hands. Teachers valued boys’ comments more than girls’ comments. Teachers responded to girls with a simple nod or an ‘okay,’ but they praised, corrected, helped, and criticized boys. Boys were encouraged to solve problems on their own, but teachers helped girls who were stuck on problems.”

Even studies critical of single-gender education have had to acknowledge the benefits that accrue to girls when in all-girl classrooms. The American Association of University Women’s Separated by Sex: A Critical Look at Single-Sex Education for Girls concluded that “No evidence shows that single-sex education works or is better for girls than coeducation,” but notes that “Some kinds of single-sex programs produce positive results for some students, including a preference for math and science among girls.”

If – as the Washington Post reports – the ACLU “contends that it is unfair for the school system to paint the problem as a gender issue instead of a more broad racial one,” it is not alone in that belief. Sara Mead, a current member of the DC Public Charter School Board, wrote in Education Sector in 2006 that “There’s no doubt that some groups of boys—particularly Hispanic and black boys and boys from low-income homes—are in real trouble. But the predominant issues for them are race and class, not gender. Closing racial and economic gaps would help poor and minority boys more than closing gender gaps, and focusing on gender gaps may distract attention from the bigger problems facing these youngsters.”

As someone who favors the idea of single-sex classrooms and schools, it is disappointing to learn that may not be feasible here. It is more disappointing to think the city will waste time fighting a losing court battle instead of moving forward with solutions based on evidence. After the D.C. attorney general initially said he would defend the city’s plans in court if necessary, he has since said he would review the subject. The chancellor plans to stay the course even though the rationale for doing so has been undermined by her own numbers, numbers that – for some reason – did not lead her to take into account the needs of girls when planning to improve the academic performance of minority males. As for the future of the city’s planned all-boys college preparatory high school, it may be necessary to look to our past. If you look at some of the old public elementary schools around town still standing, one end of those buildings have doors above which are chiseled the word “Boys.” The doors at the other end all read “Girls.”