Judge: No fundamental right to learn to read & write

[quiversR4hunting]

This case is specific to Detroit school children that were given a crappy education while the state took over Detroit Public Schools. I am aghast because it seems like this ruling could reach into homeschoolers that don't end up educating their children (Tarpins, Nauglers, etc). I am not an attorney but it seems like if a homeschool kid brings a lawsuit against their parents for educational neglect then some attorney will probably cite this case as precedent.

The dumbing down of Americans. This way the rich will have a work force too stupid to fight back.

http://ux.freep.com/story/news/education/2018/07/01/detroit-literacy-education-rights/748052002/

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

Oh dear Rufus. Someone needs to keep the politicians in my state from learning about this. I could see some of them using this as an excuse to cut school funding again. 

[Briefly]

I saw that article earlier.  I'm wondering how long I have to hold my breath for it to make sense.  It's beyond ridiculous.

[Jess]

Since the Supreme Court ghastly previously held that education isn't a fundamental right this judge didn't have much choice. Not really a surprising ruling. They never stood much chance of wining that arguement in court. Not everything can be solved with a court case. The solution is state legislation or a constitutional amendment. 

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/411/1/case.html

[acheronbeach]

To frame it as a "fundamental right to read" issue seems pretty unwise. It looks like they were trying to build new law trying to build new law, despite past jurisprudence.  You can't just "read in" new rights, nor can a lower level judge overrule a higher one.  Trying to build new law is always risky, and they lost out.  

As Jess said, another avenue seems to have been the better bet...

[laPapessaGiovanna]

1 hour ago, acheronbeach said:

To frame it as a "fundamental right to read" issue seems pretty unwise. It looks like they were trying to build new law trying to build new law, despite past jurisprudence.  You can't just "read in" new rights, nor can a lower level judge overrule a higher one.  Trying to build new law is always risky, and they lost out.  

As Jess said, another avenue seems to have been the better bet...

It's sad. That argument would have been compelling nearly everywhere outside the US.

Let's not forget that the US refused to ratify the Convention on the Right of the Child. The Convention is international law that's binding in all the countries that signed and ratified it, meaning every country beside the US.

Spoiler

The Convention obliges states to allow parents to exercise their parental responsibilities. 

The Convention forbids capital punishment for children. In its General Comment 8 (2006) the Committee on the Rights of the Child stated that there was an "obligation of all state parties to move quickly to prohibit and eliminate all corporal punishment and all other cruel or degrading forms of punishment of children".[12] Article 19 of the Convention states that state parties must "take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence",[13]but it makes no reference to corporal punishment. The Committee's interpretation of this section to encompass a prohibition on corporal punishment has been rejected by several state parties to the Convention, including Australia,[14] Canada and the United Kingdom.

 

From the text of the Convention:

Quote

Article 28

1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular:

(a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;

(b) Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education, make them available and accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education and offering financial assistance in case of need;

(c) Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means;

(d) Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children;

(e) Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention.

3. States Parties shall promote and encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.

Off Topic, but it's important to note how the tRump administration would be in violation of article 9, if the US had ratified it.

Spoiler

Article 9

1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.

2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.

3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests.

4. Where such separation results from any action initiated by a State Party, such as the detention, imprisonment, exile, deportation or death (including death arising from any cause while the person is in the custody of the State) of one or both parents or of the child, that State Party shall, upon request, provide the parents, the child or, if appropriate, another member of the family with the essential information concerning the whereabouts of the absent member(s) of the family unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall of itself entail no adverse consequences for the person(s) concerned.

 

[Jess]

7 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

It's sad. That argument would have been compelling nearly everywhere outside the US.

Let's not forget that the US refused to ratify the Convention on the Right of the Child. The Convention is international law that's binding in all the countries that signed and ratified it, meaning every country beside the US.

  Reveal hidden contents

The Convention obliges states to allow parents to exercise their parental responsibilities. 

The Convention forbids capital punishment for children. In its General Comment 8 (2006) the Committee on the Rights of the Child stated that there was an "obligation of all state parties to move quickly to prohibit and eliminate all corporal punishment and all other cruel or degrading forms of punishment of children".[12] Article 19 of the Convention states that state parties must "take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence",[13]but it makes no reference to corporal punishment. The Committee's interpretation of this section to encompass a prohibition on corporal punishment has been rejected by several state parties to the Convention, including Australia,[14] Canada and the United Kingdom.

 

From the text of the Convention:

Off Topic, but it's important to note how the tRump administration would be in violation of article 9, if the US had ratified it.

  Reveal hidden contents

Article 9

1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.

2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.

3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests.

4. Where such separation results from any action initiated by a State Party, such as the detention, imprisonment, exile, deportation or death (including death arising from any cause while the person is in the custody of the State) of one or both parents or of the child, that State Party shall, upon request, provide the parents, the child or, if appropriate, another member of the family with the essential information concerning the whereabouts of the absent member(s) of the family unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall of itself entail no adverse consequences for the person(s) concerned.

 

A fundamental right in the USA as a legal term is a pretty small list of things compared to other countries. They are almost all explicitly stated in the constitution's  mostly in the bill of rights. A few like the right to privacy aren't explicitly stated but the Supreme has said they exist. This is how we have abortion rights (for now), but also gives us the right to raise your kids how you want. 

In a practical sense when something is a fundamental right it's harder for the government to pass a law that infringes on it because it must pass a "strict scrutiny test" laws that don't infringe on a fund entail right only need to pass a rational basis test. In practice nearly everything can pass rational basis and nearly nothing can pass strict scrutiny.

A few things get a special "intermediate scrutiny" test. For example gender equality issues get this test because there is no fundamental right for women to be treated equal to men under our constitution despite what the majority of Americans seem to think. Yes, gender equality is not a fundamental right in the USA because we have never passed an equal rights amendment for women...

[Melissa1977]

8 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

It's sad. That argument would have been compelling nearly everywhere outside the US.

Let's not forget that the US refused to ratify the Convention on the Right of the Child. The Convention is international law that's binding in all the countries that signed and ratified it, meaning every country beside the US.

I'm shocked. I was going to argue that Convention on the Right of the child forces countries to ensure kids learn basical skills. But I didn't know US hadn't ratified this.

Historically, my country hasn't been an example of kids' protection, but mandatory school from 6 to 9 years old (in order to ensure all of them could read and do basic maths) was stablished at 1908. Child labour was normal then, but despite that,  literacy was seen as a necessity for the citizens. I'm appaled reading recent US news.

[Briefly]

1 hour ago, Melissa1977 said:

I'm appaled reading recent US news.

I think quite a few of us are, too.  Especially those of us that live here!

[mango_fandango]

Over here, education cuts mainly mean that schools are cutting lessons like art, music and so on. There’s a big push for STEM right now; whilst I understand, we do still need arts classes!! I just think of the London 2012 opening/closing ceremony; whilst we did celebrate things like the NHS (that saga is for another thread) and Tim Berners-Lee (who invented the World Wide Web), most of it was about our musical history... Beatles, Spice Girls, Eric Idle singing Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life... The world would be a dull place without art and music and culture.

Languages are also seen as unimportant here, although that’s mainly down to the attitudes of the public rather than the government (“everyone speaks English!” No they don’t.) Even though I’m not one, I’m part of a parenting forum. I’ve seen threads asking which language a child should do out of German and Spanish (the child usually does French already). The mix is fairly evenly split, with the same arguments each time (Spanish is easier if you already know some French, but you may mix them up as they are similar and German is different/more a challenge if the kid likes that kind of thing). Someone claimed once that German is a dying language... excuse me whilst I snort with laughter (I did both French and German at degree level). Spanish might be more widely spoken, but Germany is the biggest country by population in the EU. They might have good English in the big international cities like Berlin, but most of them will only speak German. 

(Don’t get me started on fucking Brexit. It’s a fucking shitshow).

[Shadoewolf]

What the Freep didn't mention in this article is that Michigan is a school of choice state, with a few exceptions. Kids can attend any school within their county (and sometimes out of the county under special circumstances) with a little paperwork and so long as transportation is provided for them. We get stuff in the mail all the time from surrounding school districts with the perks of transferring but we chose to rent in a very good district who doesn't participate in school of choice and loses some federal and state funding because they won't let just anybody in. Now does that excuse this ruling and asshole Snyder? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Do the Detroit schools need major overhaul not just in the buildings but as a whole? Hell yes! But until the people in these areas are willing to stand up, make their voices and votes heard and DO something other than wallow and complain, nothing is going to change.

[Jess]

50 minutes ago, Shadoewolf said:

What the Freep didn't mention in this article is that Michigan is a school of choice state, with a few exceptions. Kids can attend any school within their county (and sometimes out of the county under special circumstances) with a little paperwork and so long as transportation is provided for them. We get stuff in the mail all the time from surrounding school districts with the perks of transferring but we chose to rent in a very good district who doesn't participate in school of choice and loses some federal and state funding because they won't let just anybody in. Now does that excuse this ruling and asshole Snyder? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Do the Detroit schools need major overhaul not just in the buildings but as a whole? Hell yes! But until the people in these areas are willing to stand up, make their voices and votes heard and DO something other than wallow and complain, nothing is going to change.

School of choice is great if you can transport your kids to the school or your choice. How many parents in inner city Detroit do you think are able to do this? And how are they supposed to do anything when local control has been removed from them and handed over to the state? 

[Shadoewolf]

The transportation issue is one, but that's a choice they make. Busses run all throughout the city and the closer suburbs, including down Mack, Van Dyke, Woodward and Gratiot. It's not that hard to get into Warren, Hazel Park, Harper Woods, Dearborn, Lincoln Park, etc. I know, I grew up near Royal Oak, and currently live just a few short miles from the city line. It's not impossible. I also know a big issue facing almost all Michigan residents is the obscene amount it costs to have car insurance.  3 cars (2 with basic only, 1 with full coverage) with 1 claim (not my fault) and less than 4 points on my license and my premium is over $3,000 for 6 months. $738 a month!! USAA and Geico do not offer auto coverage here because of how our regulations are written. Nobody will underwrite here.

BUT poverty is 'sometimes' a choice between effort and accepting status quo. I look at people like Cynthia Jeub, who came from a shitty background and cult upbringing,  who is busting her ass to get and keep her own place. I don't see that in a lot of Detroit. I hear a lot of bitching and don't see a lot of action. And as I said, nothing is going to change until they make their voices heard, both in the media and at the polls. When the crumbling school buildings got plastered all over national media outlets, donations came flooding in. Now if those funds were inappropriately diverted from their intended purposes (ala Kwame Kilpatrick) then that's where the full overhaul I spoke of comes into play. And hopefully Snyder's sorry ass is gone come November! 

For the record, I also don't agree with corruption in the city, especially the Illitch's and big developers being able to buy land that was foreclosed on due to a city accounting error for pennies on the dollar then putting luxury apartments there that nobody can afford. Yeah let's build downtown up to be all pretty then price everyone but the mega-rich right out. 

[Jess]

31 minutes ago, Shadoewolf said:

The transportation issue is one, but that's a choice they make. Busses run all throughout the city and the closer suburbs, including down Mack, Van Dyke, Woodward and Gratiot. It's not that hard to get into Warren, Hazel Park, Harper Woods, Dearborn, Lincoln Park, etc. I know, I grew up near Royal Oak, and currently live just a few short miles from the city line. It's not impossible. I also know a big issue facing almost all Michigan residents is the obscene amount it costs to have car insurance.  3 cars (2 with basic only, 1 with full coverage) with 1 claim (not my fault) and less than 4 points on my license and my premium is over $3,000 for 6 months. $738 a month!! USAA and Geico do not offer auto coverage here because of how our regulations are written. Nobody will underwrite here.

BUT poverty is 'sometimes' a choice between effort and accepting status quo. I look at people like Cynthia Jeub, who came from a shitty background and cult upbringing,  who is busting her ass to get and keep her own place. I don't see that in a lot of Detroit. I hear a lot of bitching and don't see a lot of action. And as I said, nothing is going to change until they make their voices heard, both in the media and at the polls. When the crumbling school buildings got plastered all over national media outlets, donations came flooding in. Now if those funds were inappropriately diverted from their intended purposes (ala Kwame Kilpatrick) then that's where the full overhaul I spoke of comes into play. And hopefully Snyder's sorry ass is gone come November! 

For the record, I also don't agree with corruption in the city, especially the Illitch's and big developers being able to buy land that was foreclosed on due to a city accounting error for pennies on the dollar then putting luxury apartments there that nobody can afford. Yeah let's build downtown up to be all pretty then price everyone but the mega-rich right out. 

Okay first let’s say you find a school district that is good and participates in school of choice, has space, your kid qualifies, and there is a bus route going there. How many of those spots do you think there are? Now you need to have a job that accommodates you going to and from this school on the bus five days a week. Even the bus costs adds up for low income families. This is seriously not a realistic option. 

As to moving out of Detroit sure for lots of people it is that’s why the city is so empty. But for everyone that can move there is someone who can’t. This is their community where there support system is. They have elderly family members who need them, it’s where family members can provide free child care etc. To move out you need to be able to leave your support system, have enough money to move (first and last months rent security deposit etc.), and a job in this new area that is also cheap enough to live in your found for yourself. This isn’t easy. 

As to fixing Detroit’s schools they don’t have any local control anymore it’s under state control. Voting locally will do nothing. They need the state legislature to change the law that took away control or a new governer to appoint someone else. Neither of those things can be done with a local vote.

[Shadoewolf]

All 38 Michigan Senate and 110 House seats are open in the November election. I'm not talking local voting. Michigan is currently Republican controlled and that hasn't gone well at all! Athough I'll be interested to see how Duggan does and watch Snyder get thrown out on a rail. And change can start as a stream and turn into a deluge if enough force is applied. Sitting and accepting ones circumstances as they are is how people get nowhere. There's always a way out.

My child support just dropped $500 a month because Oldest graduated and turned 18. My car insurance just shot up, AT&T royally screwed us last month and my windows leak horribly so my A/C bill is killing us. I  have a kid on the spectrum and haven't worked in years because of his issues. I know all about limitations and support systems. But I'm not whing and accepting it, I put in 10 job applications today. It's not impossible and it really irritates me when broad excuses are made. 

[Jess]

23 minutes ago, Shadoewolf said:

All 38 Michigan Senate and 110 House seats are open in the November election. I'm not talking local voting. Michigan is currently Republican controlled and that hasn't gone well at all! Athough I'll be interested to see how Duggan does and watch Snyder get thrown out on a rail. And change can start as a stream and turn into a deluge if enough force is applied. Sitting and accepting ones circumstances as they are is how people get nowhere. There's always a way out.

My child support just dropped $500 a month because Oldest graduated and turned 18. My car insurance just shot up, AT&T royally screwed us last month and my windows leak horribly so my A/C bill is killing us. I  have a kid on the spectrum and haven't worked in years because of his issues. I know all about limitations and support systems. But I'm not whing and accepting it, I put in 10 job applications today. It's not impossible and it really irritates me when broad excuses are made. 

People in Detroit only get to vote for their one one state senator and one state rep they don't get to vote for all the open seats. Detroit doesnt vote republican. They just live with the results from the rest of the state they can't control the situation. 

[47of74]

It's easier to get stupid people to be Branch Trumpvidians and to get them to vote for Fuck Face and Nazis Republicans.

[PinkPrincess0213]

It is not only an issue with school of choice issue within traditional public districts. We also have several for-profit charter companies operating here that dilute resources away from those traditional public schools districts. They are managed badly, with high-staff turnover due to low pay, poor working conditions (think disgusting and unsafe buildings) and often, bad administration. They play games with enrollment as well, leading to students coming and going all the time. I spent just over 2 years working as  a teacher for a management company that manages several schools here and the things that happened there were unreal.

There are many issues here in the state of Michigan. Like @Shadoewolf, we were able to chose to live in a good district for my children. But it is far from easy for everyone to have those same choices here.

[Ali]

School of choice frequently leads to white flight to private schools. Parents do not want their children going to school with the kids from the inner cities, so they take them out of public school and put them in private school.

I have observed many different levels of schools in Michigan. The resources at the public schools in low income areas vastly different than in a wealthier community.

Segregation still exists in Michigan. There are all black schools in Flint and Detroit. Everyone that has the resources to leave has already left years ago.

It was heartbreaking to observe these low income students in the big cities. Many at the high school level could barely read. Some were extremely intelligent, but had not options at their school to challenge themselves. Imagine being gifted in math and attending a high school that offers no classes beyond Algebra 2.

[Jess]

2 hours ago, Ali said:

School of choice frequently leads to white flight to private schools. Parents do not want their children going to school with the kids from the inner cities, so they take them out of public school and put them in private school.

I have observed many different levels of schools in Michigan. The resources at the public schools in low income areas vastly different than in a wealthier community.

Segregation still exists in Michigan. There are all black schools in Flint and Detroit. Everyone that has the resources to leave has already left years ago.

It was heartbreaking to observe these low income students in the big cities. Many at the high school level could barely read. Some were extremely intelligent, but had not options at their school to challenge themselves. Imagine being gifted in math and attending a high school that offers no classes beyond Algebra 2.

School of choice in Michigan isn't a voucher program so you can not go to private schools. It allows you to transfer to another public school school district. However, districts do not have to participate and can place some restrictions. Which means an inner city detriot African American child has about zero chance of getting out of detriot schools even if their parent does everything possible. Not everyone is blessed with parents that give a shit about education and look for opportunities for their kids it doesn't mean we should give up on their kids as a society. 

Segregation in schools still exists in lots of places here. NYC being the prime example. But if you were to force NYC to desegregate white flight would be so bad the school system would collapse within a few years leaving the kids left much worse off then they are now. Some times there are no good solutions.

Charter schools overall in most parts of the country are terrible. The ones that do show success mostly do so by "cheating". They don't take special needs kids, and they enforce behavior standards so strictly that "problem kids" are forced out. This means public schools get less overall resources and have a high p rctage of kids that need more resources. The charter school looks good but the public system could as well if they could selectively choose who to educate. 

 

[Shadoewolf]

I'm not saying school of choice doesn't have it's flaws, but it's still an option. I get mailers every week trying to recruit my kids to transfer. There are billboards on I-94 and 696 touting various schools and open enrollment. Harper Woods, Eastpointe, Roseville, St. Clair Shores, Hazel Park, Warren and Warren Consolidated, just to name a few.  Is it a solution for every kid? No. But it's better than enabling them with excuses. We took our adopted senior out of a crappy school in rural Arkansas and dropped him into one of the highest ranked high schools in the country for college readiness. He had it rough at first, and when he whined about it we told him he had 2 choices. He could continue to whine about it and fail, or he could take advantage of the resources the school offers (teachers who stay after, free NHS tutoring, etc)  and get on with it. He chose to get help, work hard and graduated cum laude a few weeks back. I don't believe in making excuses. It can get better when people stop accepting the status quo.

I also find it very interesting that one of the wealthiest public districts in the state has a high school that is more than 70%  African American.  Made headlines because they chose a Muslim class speaker and it wasn't anywhere near Dearborn. The private schools DO offer scholarships for inner city kids but you can't sit and expect to just be given one. There's also decent homeschooling options, both in networks and online.

Not saying I agree with the ruling, actually I think it's shitty. Not saying that Detroit schools don't need a massive overhaul, they absolutely do. But in the meantime we have to arm those kids with the ability to excel in spite of the circumstances, and get teachers and parents standing up and making a hell of a lot of noise. 

[Briefly]

We went private school for elementary with our daughter.  Mr. Briefly worked for a local school district and it may claim to be a great district, but he saw too much while he worked there.  He is not a teacher, by the way.  The school for the neighborhood we lived in was not that good, so we looked into private and found a good one. It was a Christian school and we knew there would be things we disagreed with - and there were, we had to do a lot of "reinstructing" on our own.  But they had an amazing reading program, and that was the clincher for our early reader's education. Even though we paid for her tuition, our taxes still paid for the public schools.  I understand all about parents wanting the best education for their children, but I disagreed with vouchers being used for private schools.  We scrimped to be able to afford tuition, but we didn't mind because it was for her education.  I'm not sure if our opinion is/was right, but it was our opinion at the time.

[Ali]

10 hours ago, Jess said:

School of choice in Michigan isn't a voucher program so you can not go to private schools. It allows you to transfer to another public school school district.

Yes, I am relieved that Michigan does not offer vouchers for private school and hopefully November's election helps keep that from happening.

Parents who can afford it will frequently send their kids to private schools so their children will not have to go to school with "those" children. I am not saying school of choice is a bad thing. I am only trying to point out that it does not solve the problem. I have unfortunately heard negative comments about some excellent districts recently due to the of student coming in due to school of choice. 

I agree completely about not giving up on these kids. I am currently looking for a teaching job in Michigan and have applied to every public school math teacher position within a reasonable radius including some districts that are in low income areas and districts I have been told to avoid due to school of choice. I am really hoping to avoid working in a charter school.

[PinkPrincess0213]

@Ali, I am currently looking for a teaching job in Michigan as well. I have done 4 years - 2 in charters, 2 in a public school district that is in trouble. My reasons for leaving the district I was in last year has nothing to do with my students - it was a mostly low-income district with many choice students - and everything to do with administrative issues. It breaks my heart to have to leave, but at the end of the day, I need to take care of my family. I am sure that you will do amazing, no matter where you end up.

[mango_fandango]

It’s so interesting because “school of choice” is the done thing here. You apply for up to six schools (state). Every year, some kids don’t get into any of their choices. There are admissions criteria used if a school is oversubscribed, like if a child is looked after (assuming that’s fostering or something), siblings, etc. There are also faith schools. C of E ones must have a 50:50 split on “foundation” places (ie those who are Christian) and “open” places, ie those who aren’t. My primary school was C of E and I got an “open” place. Most of the primaries near where I live are C of E, so my parents had little choice otherwise even though we aren’t religious. Catholic schools don’t have to have the 50:50 split. 

Private schools are different. They’re mostly selective. “Prep” schools are for those aged 4-11/13. 13 used to be the main admissions point for the old “public” schools (fancy places like Eton where Princes William and Harry went), although most schools are 4-11 and then 11-18 now. With some of the prep schools, you have to get the child’s name down at birth FFS! With the normal state schools you apply the academic year before the kid would start. Some schools have both a junior and senior department, so you could spend fourteen years at the same place. This was the case with my (private) school, some of the girls who left with me five years ago had only ever been to that school. I think those schools tend to do the “apply the year before the kid starts” thing. 

Some schools are single-sex, most are co-ed. Some single-sex schools have a mixed sixth form (last two years)... not mine. My school was very much a “girls do best in single-sex schools, girls can do anything” type of place. There are loads of stereotypes about all-girls’ schools, which weren’t true IME (eg they’re so bitchy/cliquey).