The written proposal included the statement, "The Fundamentals Department proposes some changes be made to study the effects of same- sex classes on student success and retention at the Fundamentals English level." The proposal was taken to the ABE faculty meeting, where it was approved.

Proposals for new kinds of programming are usually taken to the CIGS, the Cowichan Instructional Coordination Group, a committee composed of representatives of various departments on campus, including ABE and student services. CIGS supported the proposal and made some suggestions. They wanted to provide extra support from counselling for the separate classes, perhaps in the form of a counsellor coming to each class for art hour a week for a class meeting and being available for individual counselling at other times. They also suggested an evaluation process be in place when classes were started. The committee wanted to be sure that the form of the class would be advertised so that students joining the classes would not be surprised at finding themselves in a same-sex group.

At the time of the proposal, the level 1 and 2 classes included twelve women and twelve men. Eight of the men and five of the women were First Nations students, three of the women were Chinese-speaking immigrants, there were four students with physical, visual, and learning disabilities, and approximately fourteen of the students were under 30.

Kate and Vicki decided to put the proposal to the students in the fundamentals classes for their approval. At a meeting of all students from level 1 and 2, they described what they proposed and gave some reasons for it:

• that they found that men and women students often had different interests, and wanted to talk and write about different things
• that men tended to talk more in the class
• that women had a hard time getting their views across
• that men were often frustrated by a teacher trying to get them to be quiet long enough for the women to feel comfortable to speak
• that the teachers found it hard to facilitate such discussions.

Discussion of the proposal was dominated entirely by men. One man spoke briefly and somewhat disjointedly in favour of the proposal. He thought it would be good for men to be together to talk about their feelings. Another spoke long and often to say it was a stupid idea. He said that school was not a place to discuss feelings, that you come to do your work and that was all, and there was no need to split the class up. A third man spoke once in a very angry tone. He said he liked to look at girls, to talk to girls, to work with girls, and he was not into a macho trip and did not want to be in a class with all guys.

Except for one women who spoke early in the discussion about her positive experience in another all-woman class, none of the women spoke, although the two teachers encouraged them as much as possible, by saying such things as, "I'd like to hear from someone who hasn't spoken yet," and making eye contact with women and asking if they had anything to say.

At the end of the discussion, the class broke for lunch and were to vote afterwards. Just as the class was breaking up, but before anyone had left the tables, the counsellor who was there as an observer said that he agreed with the last speaker, he really preferred to work in a mixed group.

After lunch, the class voted nine to one against splitting up the fundamentals class into same-sex groups. A couple of women did not vote because they did not plan to be in the class next term. As a result of the vote, the plan was dropped.