By Dannielle Miller OAM
This week I had a query from a leader in a school asking for my thoughts on co-ed schools running separate sessions for respectful relationships and consent.
Some students, and some staff, worry that separating the genders signals something sexist (that the girls might be told how to dress for example, or that boys might be excused or blamed).
Read the latest print edition of School News online HERE.
I actually welcome the scepticism. Teenagers have been subjected to plenty of sexist nonsense over the years, so questioning the intent behind an approach is a healthy place to start.
To be clear, separation, when done well, is not about different content or lowered expectations but rather about creating the conditions that allow young people to actually engage.
Related School News article: Beyond the manosphere: the toxic ideology behind Louis Theroux’s doco
In my work, particularly around respectful relationships and consent, boys and girls are taught the same material. The difference is not what is said, but the space in which it is said, and how it is delivered.
My first priority is always psychological safety. These conversations are personal and emotional, and they are often tied to lived experience. A trauma-informed approach requires us to assume that in any given room, some students have already been harmed, some are currently unsafe, and some are navigating fear, pressure, or confusion they have never spoken about out loud.
Girls tell us consistently that in mixed-gender settings they self-censor. They downplay discomfort. They stay quiet to avoid being judged, laughed at, or labelled dramatic. That is not an environment that supports learning or disclosure.
I once had a teacher stop me before a session and say, “Don’t you think it’s important that boys are sitting there hearing girls describe how uncomfortable sexism makes them feel?”
No. I do not think it is the girls’ job to do that emotional labour.
I do not believe they should have to expose their wounds in order for boys to understand why respect matters.
Girls deserve space to speak freely, to connect with one another, to name what feels wrong, to practise language, and build strategies so they can back themselves and each other when something does not sit right next time.
Boys need something just as important: a space where they can be challenged without performing. Where they can ask questions they would never ask in front of girls and can examine how disrespectful behaviour does not just harm girls and women, but harms them too. Mixed rooms often reward bravado while single-gender spaces allow more honesty.
Our gender-diverse students always choose the space they feel safest in. We use gender-neutral language throughout, reference LGBTQI support services, and explicitly discuss how relationship abuse can look different in queer relationships, including identity abuse. We talk about partners and dates, not boyfriends and girlfriends. Both spaces are inclusive.
What often gets missed in these debates is that equity does not mean everyone sitting in the same room. When power dynamics are uneven, identical conditions produce unequal outcomes.
There is another layer to this conversation that matters too, and it is often glossed over. I have seen this borne out again and again.
Programs like this only work when the people delivering them are properly trained, supported, and held to a clear model.
When that is missing, even the best intentions can fall flat, and this work is far too important for that.
Recently, I was at a school where the girls were openly sceptical about being separated. Halfway through the session, they told me they had complained beforehand and now felt embarrassed because they could see this was exactly what they needed. During the break, they went to leadership and said so themselves. They spoke about the value of having a girls’ space and why the sense of connection mattered.
The day ended with absolute rave reviews from students across the board.
And importantly, the learning does not end in separate rooms. Students always come back together afterwards. They share reflections, discuss what they have learnt, and talk about how they want to move forward together. But they do so after having space to process and after feeling safe enough to speak honestly.
This approach is not ideological. It comes from what we see in real classrooms, with real students, week after week.
There is one last thing I want to add, because this question about separation versus togetherness also comes up constantly in our work with Women’s Community Shelters. WCS is a network of frontline services supporting women and children escaping violence, and we have been really proud to partner with them for the past seven years, delivering primary prevention programs that are having a significant impact.
Their Walk The Talk program is intentionally designed in two phases. Phase one is education, and that learning happens in separate gender spaces. Phase two is activation, where students come back together to work on something positive and practical in their own communities. We did not land on that order by chance.
When we looked closely at the impact data from 2023, what stood out was how often the learning translated into action. Nearly three quarters of schools that completed the education phase went on to engage in the activation phase, supporting their local women’s shelter through fundraising, volunteering, and awareness work.
Students did not disengage after being separated. They stayed involved.
Teachers spoke about how the education phase changed the way students showed up afterwards. Several said they felt more confident responding to disclosures, because students had the language to explain what was happening and teachers felt steadier about next steps.
This article was written by Dannielle Miller OAM, CEO of Enlighten Education
