A bit more on single sex schools:

I discovered this link, which claims that the way to "use a single sex approach in a coed classroom" is to have textbooks that focus more on women's achievements. What? The author gives no reason that this will actually solve the problem that he acknowledges, ie that boys get more attention in classes than girls. He uses data that shows that women in single sex colleges are more likely to go into math/science/medicine than their counterparts in coed colleges, but has no evidence that shows that these girls are more likely to learn more about historical achievements of women, much ess any evidence that shows a correlation.

And the fact is that historically men have had more influence on history, science, and math, and I don't believe that students should learn less about important events/theorems from history because they are learning more about the role of comparatively unimportant women. I mean, social history can include more of women's roles, assuming the information is there, but I think high school history is more or less political/economic/military (and maybe that's a bad thing-- I know I vastly prefer social history to military history). So maybe a restructuring of high school history curricula might not be a bad thing, but if all that the author is advocating is talking less about Newton and more about Noether, or less about Caesar and more about Calpurnia, I find that vaguely insulting.

Look, there's no reason to pretend that there was any sort of gender equality in the past. There wasn't. We should accept that and move on, not try to rewrite history so that it looks like women were at all proportionally represented.