At first glance, it looks like a program that most can oppose. When school districts start talking about gender differences in educational ability, red flags pop up everywhere, and who can blame us for feeling this way? The truth is that breaking boys and girls apart from each other in public school classrooms because they "learn differently" just sounds bad. Then, we are quickly reminded of the overt sexism in education of the past and even more recent examples, such as former Harvard University President Lawrence Summers, who said that "innate" differences in learning ability caused women to pursue fields other than math and science. But if you take a closer look at the recent gender-based educational classes introduced at two high schools in Wisconsin, it is easy to see how these programs actually enhance equality, rather than inhibit it as Summers' comments or previous educational methods had in the past. Arrowhead High School in Hartland and D.C. Everest Senior High School in Weston are the latest to jump on this bandwagon of separating girls and boys into different classrooms. The programs are entirely voluntary, meaning that boys and girls who want to learn in coeducational environments are still provided the opportunity to do so, and the program only applies to a few subjects. The underlying logic behind this is not just that girls and boys learn differently, it is that girls will be able to express themselves more freely in an all-female environment as opposed to the status quo. The results thus far are encouraging and perhaps surprising as the girls have been outperforming their male counterparts, as reported in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. But in these times of political correctness, surely recognizing differences between sexes in education, like Summers attempted to, could lead to the schools being brandished as sexist or misogynist. Not so says Arrowhead Principal Gregg Wieczorek, who told The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the reason people believe these programs are controversial is only because "not everyone's doing it" — a point that is sure to be lost on a great deal of people, but shouldn't be. The program appears to be helping young women learn in a way that can insulate themselves from often distracting and domineering young men, and that in itself is worth something. Even if the girls are being placed into an educational environment that rarely exists in the outside world, cultivating and giving young women the kind of confidence that this program seems to inspire is an encouraging sign of greater equality on the horizon. Because the programs are voluntary and strictly up to the students' discretion to participate in, the students are not being put into situations where they are forced to recognize differences by sex, as girls and boys can continue to learn together if they so choose. However, for others who prefer to learn in same-sex environments, which may be more conducive to their learning styles, these programs offer the opportunity for choice in education where it had been previously lacking. The separation between the two sexes does not assume a connection between learning capacity and sex, as girls and boys are not being separated into remedial courses for one and advanced for the other. Rather, because the program seems to be finding ways for talented young women and men to find different methods of learning to maximize their knowledge, it serves their interests better than if the programs did not exist. Fundamental to the acceptability of this program is the fact that choice exists. Without this, it could be perceived as perpetuating an unjust assumption that young women and men prefer to learn or learn best with each of their respective sexes. But in this case, it provides a choice for these young people, and consequently gives them the opportunity to succeed and eventually become equal in an environment that had been previously absent. And that is precisely what feminism and equality are about. Robert Phansalkar ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in languages and cultures of Asia and political science.