It's a contradiction. Schools that segregate students by sex are required to reinforce equality education. Would it not be easier for students to live toger in equality and save that effort? Neir does people's Party nor conservative majority of Constitutional Court, which has settled long legal battle in favor of those centers — usually religious — can perceive public subsidies because y do not violate principle of Equality. Separating children from girls, in short, according to High Court, is fully constitutional. The road is refore expeditious for all those who, with public money, select ir students by social level, religious belief or skin color. The aberration is served.
The ruling of Constitutional Court last April has caused little excitement in such turbulent moments of Spanish news and yet it is a setback to fight for equality. The test is in educational law itself, LOMCE, promoted by n Minister José Ignacio Wert, that in order to circumvent just great contradiction introduced obligation only to segregated centers to take measures to promote equality. In short, it imposes it almost as one more subject — spoken in colloquial terms.
What is reason that almost 200 centers in Spain choose this type of education? They allege pedagogical advantages, which is hardly demonstrable. Do y evaluate similar individuals in a mixed school and segregated schools so that y can establish differences? Do y do it with whole groups? Do children need different subjects than girls? Do y learn se faster and refore require different rhythms? And in that case, why not mix so that some learn from ors? Why would it be intolerable for us to select only those of high social and cultural level — who tend to get better grades — and we see sex segregation so naturally? It seems clear that inertia of an unequal past is imposed against essential and constitutional criteria.
The particular vote of Judge Fernando Valdés Dal-Ré, which has been adhered to by former Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido, is an exercise of overwhelming logic in defense of public school. "Gender-differentiated education denies role of school as a space for excellence in socialization and coexistence in equality," he says, "and contributes to perpetuating sexist stereotypes." Dal-Ré, in addition, sees in defense of segregated centers a parallelism of notion of education with principle of "separate but equal" which in 1896 justified racial segregation in United States.
With LOMCE missed opportunity to free education from old prejudices. The lack of consensus among parties to sign an educational pact promises to maintain status quo. This law of Wert introduced some educational improvement, but it shielded kind of religion and legislated precisely so that it could continue subsidizing segregated centers. That deliverance seems an impossible battle; At least as long as religion, something that should be in private sphere, remains so present in Spanish classrooms.
You can follow country opinion on Facebook, Twitter or subscribe here to Newsletter.