<p>LYNCHBURG, Virginia (AP) -- Amid boos and shouts of "traitors" Randolph-Macon Woman's College officials announced Saturday that men would be admitted to the 115-year-old institution starting in 2007.</p>
<p>In the eyes of the board of trustees, going coed could help stabilize the school's finances as interest in all-women schools wanes.</p>
<p>I think this is a bad move. As gender differences become better outlined the interest is women's colleges is going to climb. They need to consult Dr. Leonard Sax. He practices in Virginia.</p>
<p>It's a nicely endowed college ($171k per student, compare to Oberlin at $218k or Davidson at $222k).</p>
<p>But, despite everything they could possibly do, they cannot maintain their enrollment. They've cut prices to the bone offering need-based discounts to 67% of the students and hefty merit discounts to a whopping 33% of the students. They are only charging, on average, $14,000 a year for tuition, fees, and room/board.</p>
<p>They have an acceptance rate of 87% (for all intents and purposes, anyone who applies gets in). Yet, they've seen their enrollment shrink to only 700 students during a period of time when there are record numbers of students applying to colleges. At what point does the school simply cease to exist because it doesn't have any customers? What else could they do to overcome the fact that consumers do not want to go to single-sex colleges?</p>
<p>The board considered two other options: merging into another school and closing its doors (using the endowment as a scholarship fund to attend other schools).</p>
<p>i think interesteddad is on the money with his evaluation of the situation but it is still such a shame to see another women's college disappear. my daughter attended a single sex high school and she had a superb experience. i hoped she would attend an all women's college but she was wowed by the big name schools.</p>
<p>I'm trying to get my sister interested in them. With her interests in creative writing (and shyness), I think she'd do well at a women's college. I have two friends at Hollins and they are having an absolute blast.</p>
<p>I strongly suggested them to my daughter- as a lesbian you would think she would be interested?
But she wouldn't even consider them, even though several of her friends were attending Barnard,MHC & Smith.
However they also mentioned that they have men in their classes, so it isn't like they never see a man.
( I also tried to get her to consider a girls high school, but the dress code would have meant that she would have needed a new wardrobe ;) )</p>
<p>I think that it is important that we have them, but how else could you increase interest if it is already priced below comparable coed colleges?</p>
<p>A friend of mine who is a R-MWC grad said she has given her last penny to the school and I don't think she's alone. I know many women who stopped donating to their alma maters when their colleges went co-ed in the 70's/80's.</p>
<p>There are 3 women's schools in that region, Hollins, R-MWC and Sweet Briar, all pretty close on the UNSWR rankings. Interestingly enough, Hampden-Sydney (one of the few remaining all-male schools is down there as well. I wonder if SB and Hollins will pick up some of the transfers?</p>
<p>As a Virginia female, my D received a lot of college literature from all 3. One thing that stood out with Sweet Briar promotions was the focus on tradition. My friend from SB who worked in admissions said SB tried marketing to the global student but it wasn't successful. They then went back to promoting the "traditions" aspects of SB which as a campaign, apparently has done fairly well. Lots of current students have at least one family member who is a graduate.</p>
<p>RMWC appears to be doing what it's doing because it has to if it's going to survive. And it probably will survive. Alumnae who have a problem with this should pony up $500 million or so to keep the school single-sex. Barring that, I would suggest they recognize the inevitable business issues.</p>
<p>I well remember this sort of protest when all-male colleges started admitting females. Same thing, different chapter.</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with the alumnae response. Also, you people are completely sexist. When the all-male schools went coed in the 70s and 80s, did anyone scream "hysteria" when the men stopped donating? What, women aren't allowed to make business decisions with their money, in terms of only supporting things of which they approve?</p>
<p>Schools can make business decisions. Those decisions are not without consequences. My father stopped donating to his alma mater when my sister toured it and their tour guide was a nightmare. Should he (morally or physically) be forced to donate? HELLOOO! Donations to a college are a gift, not a right.</p>
<p>That all said, a women's college, out in a rural place, without a strong focus on tradition, is doomed to fail. I think that colleges are starting to realise that tradition draws students in, attracts them, and makes them enjoy their time. It also helps them to bond with alums.</p>
<p>I think the implicit threats when men's schools went coed came mostly from women who were threatening lawsuits over admissions as they did at the Citadel and others schools. No such threat hangs over RMWC. Just going broke.</p>
<p>I disagree. The Citadel case was 1996. The VMI case was 1994. Those were public schools and thus bound to the XIV Amendment. That's why Hampden-Sydney and Wabash can be all male, and Smith or Wellesley or Bryn Mawr aren't being sued for discrimination (Mississippi University of Women being directly on point). Many of the schools that went coed did so in the 70s and 80s - long before the Citadel/VMI line of cases - and they are private schools anyway, so they can do whatever they want. So the threat isn't there, Barrons.</p>
<p>Now, law schools were forced to integrate in the early 1970s because the ABA threatened to pull the accreditation of any school that did not admit men and women. (Note that they are engaging in a similar tactic these days - see the Revised Standard 211.)</p>
<p>Private schools didn't fear lawsuits when they integrated. You are factually wrong on that one. The schools did not have psychic powers into what the Supreme Court would rule about twenty years into the future. Even if they did, there's a reason that constitutional cases are only brought before public schools!</p>
<p>While they weren't going broke, they did see an opportunity to radically increase the prestige of their schools. All-mens schools held less appeal for men; by admitting women, they more than doubled their potential pool (adding women + men who wanted a coed school). Many formerly all-male schools saw a rapid increase in average GPAs and SAT scores. It was a business decision.</p>
<p>I think there was a lot of political pressure to open up Princeton, Harvard and others to women in the 70's. It was seen as the path to power much like the current fights over private country clubs etc. For lesser schools it may have been about the $$$--as it is at RMWC.</p>
<p>There was pressure to admit women at the historically male elite colleges and universities.</p>
<p>But, don't kid yourself. The hot topic of discussion in the hallowed halls throughout the 1960s was the impending end of the baby boom demographics. The colleges, including the blueblood schools, were all looking at the same projections of rapidly declining applicant pools. Going coed was a marketing decision.</p>
<p>Our D was accepted at RMWC for the class of 2010, with an offer of a 13,500 per annum scholarship. Our D looked at All woman and Co-Ed colleges and was accepted at two all woman and five Co-Ed colleges.</p>
<p>RMWC was visited three times by our D and she was impressed with the school, its setting and its traditions. She was concerned with the size of the student body.</p>
<p>RMWC had the smallest student body of all the schools she considered and now it has 712 (down from 765 - when she visited).</p>
<p>Ultimately, although RMWC offered the best financial package with its lower overall costs plus the generous scholarship, our D selected a Co-Ed College. All of her schools were LAC's with the largest having 3,000 students. She wanted a Liberal Arts institution with emphasis on the undergraduate. Her Mother graduated from Goucher when it was all woman) and so she knew the plus and minus of an all woman setting.</p>
<p>RMWC was clearly suffering from a lack of interest from the young ladies seeking colleges. I do believe that had RMWC remained all woman, it would fad from existence in the next decade.</p>
<p>Going Co-Ed does offer problems. We have seen how hard it was for Goucher to convert to Co-Ed. However, Goucher is now seemingly able to be functioning and succeeding as a Co-Ed LAC.</p>
<p>The location in Lynchburg might be a problem as Lynchburg College a Co-Ed school in the CTCL group will now be a direct competitor and Liberty University with its "Jerry Falwell' influence might be a turnoff for some students.</p>
<p>I liked RMWC and do hope they will be successful in their transition.</p>
<p>Just spend an evening at the Bull Branch or Annies and you will find the Falwell influence does not carry far off the LU campus. LC has had no problem attracting a growing and better qualified group of kids to Lynchburg. And there are now TWO Starbucks!</p>
<p>PS--Good to get input from an actual prospect parent.</p>
<p>Even though the new mellineum further eradicates the concept of the unisex school, what would poor Daisy think if Sweet Briar went co-ed? Sorry, but I think Sweet Briar is stuck in tradition....for better or worse.</p>