GIRLS, GIR LS, GIRLS

Single-sex education was supposed to be a relic of a bygone era, but getting into a top all-girls institution has never been more competitive. Is old-school the secret to modern academic success?

- BY NICOLE LAPORTE

I write about education, and I can safely say I think way too much about schools. So when it came time to choose one for my daughter, a plan had long been in place. A self-directed 11-year-old who is happiest making things—crepes, bucket hats, short movies—of course she would attend the progressive, independent school I had long admired. But when we toured the school, the vibe felt fast and a little flashy. Girls were in crop tops with stacks of expensive bracelets. High school boys loped around in hoodies, scrolling their phones. I began to realize that I was more old-fashioned than I thought—at least in terms of how I thought about childhood. I wanted to try to preserve a few last gasps of my sunny, sweet-natured child before I lost her to teendom.

In many ways the school search was foreign to me. I attended a suburban public high school on the East Coast that everyone in town went to. In Los Angeles things were trickier. Our zoned middle school was enormous, so we explored private options. At the urging of friends, I reluctantly signed up to tour the Archer School for Girls, which was established in 1995, convinced I'd be unmoved. In high school, guy friends mattered to me. As for uniforms, I was a jeans, not skirts, person. My daughter is similarly unfrilly. Why on earth would I consider a girls school?

And yet a few weeks later my husband and I found ourselves sitting in a wood-paneled library listening to young women in charcoal skirts and polos speak articulately about developing into leaders at the school. They were serious but also self-deprecating and funny. Pretty soon I was falling hard for the messaging: Here, only girls could be class presidents and robotics captains. Here, they “developed their voice.” Here, they were free to just be.