The Lame Defense of Women's Colleges

College Search & Selection
41

<p>^^ You certainly CAN. It’s a perfectly reasonable, though flawed, hypothetical. You may of course add as many caveats as you wish, but the posed hypothetical is reasonable.</p>

<p>Most LACs don’t have engineering schools or graduate programs, yes; I can think of several that do have engineering (Swarthmore, Bucknell, Lafayette, Union) and more that have graduate programs (you never specified they had to be top-X grad programs–lots of colleges offer a master’s in education, for instance, and even aside from that, cf. Wesleyan).</p>

42

<p>“This was my point on the first page; there’s really no justification for single-sex colleges unless there is some reason for them other than the fact that they are just good colleges.”</p>

<p>The reason for them is that they can educate and prepare women for lives as women in a culture in which women’s lives ARE different. Other than that, they need no justification. (As LACs, they would need a separate justification.)</p>

<p>What’s the point of educating and preparing the 50% of men in your hypothetical for lives as women?</p>

43

<p>My hypothetical is not Hunt’s hypothetical. I did not make the claim that there is no justification for single-sex colleges.</p>

<p>If that is your response–perfectly valid–then the question becomes supposed academic benefits vs. supposed social drawbacks. Both are true for the majority of the population, though not for a minority (e.g. some women may do fine with coed preparation for living in a multiple-sex world; some women may not want to involve themselves in romantic relationships in college, or are attracted to those of the same sex).</p>

<p>After all, HBCUs exist because life as a black person–male or female–is different from life as a person of another race. Would all black people receive a superior education at an HBCU? I would argue not, for the same reasons that I would argue a single-sex education is NOT superior for ALL women, even when the pool of “all” is limited to those for whom the college is an academic fit and who seeks an LAC. I’m no psychology expert, but it seems plausible to me that SOME women might need to “practice” everyday interaction with males in order to best prepare THEM to compete against men after college.</p>

44

<p>maybe this is a bit off topic, but do you see men’s colleges like Wabash as necessary or relevant as women’s colleges? I’m interested in what you all think</p>

45

<p>Mission</p>

<p>Smith College educates women of promise for lives of distinction. </p>

<p>“Would all black people receive a superior education at an HBCU?”</p>

<p>For women, this is a data question. And I think the data are quite clear. Could there be other women at the college? Of course. But there aren’t. This is an empirical question, not a theoretical one. Those who attend receive a superior education. As for those who don’t, another question entirely. I’m sure there are plenty of good reasons to choose an inferior education.</p>

46

<p>^^ A lot of people do it for the football teams. :D</p>

47

<p>I personally think that another all-male college, Deep Springs, should be legally required to go coed. There is no similar coed institution to DS in the nation or the world (wasn’t that the rationale behind forcing military academies to gender-integrate?).</p>

48

<p>

I’m always curious about attempts to compare the “outputs” from colleges in order to gauge the quality of the education. What is the proper thing to measure? What about income ten or twenty years out? Or maybe job satisfaction? Or satisfaction with education received at some later date? I’m very suspicious, in particular, of comparisons of the number of Ph.Ds–different schools have different cultures in terms of whether graduates go into academia, or go to law or business school, or go directly into employment.</p>

49

<p>

</p>

<p>Military academies are public institutions. Deep Springs is private. Deep Springs can do whatever it wants. Thankfully. The day when an institution such as Deep Springs can be forced to go coed by legal means would be a sad one. If they CHOOSE to do so, it’s another matter.</p>

<p>Certainly, Deep Springs would have more applicants if it were coed. So would Wellesley. But then both would be different institutions.</p>

50

<p>^Right, I forgot about the public/private distinction. I rest my case on personal principles, then. But then I subscribe to the minority school of thought that says only Caltech is truly following its nondiscrimination statement.</p>

<p>Deep Springs has, in the past, received some of its best applications from women. An affirmative-action based argument can be made for women’s colleges, but otherwise it seems to me that Deep Springs (and Wabash) is discriminatory in the same way that a mandated all-white college would be discriminatory.</p>

<p>And unlike Wellesley, DS couldn’t care less about the number of applicants as long as they get enough qualified people (unlikely to change, given the Telluride feeder connection). Does the school even show up on rankings?</p>

51

<p>How do you know that Deep Springs has received some of its best applications from women?</p>

<p>Deep Springs is the only 2-yr school included in PR’s XXX Best Colleges. For obvious reasons.</p>

52

<p>^ I was told by a reliable source from within the Telluride Association. It’s not exactly secret knowledge, though like any TA lore, it is obscure. DS brings out the female applications for perusal every time they vote on whether to go coed. (TA keeps a lifetime dossier on everyone who applies to the Association or is an alum. It’s kind of freakish to think about.)</p>

53

<p>Definitely an unusual institution. :)</p>

54

<p>Another (long) article, this one by a Smith alumna. It is 10+ years old, so probably new studies contradictory those that she cites are out by now. (Links to them would be helpful; I find myself quite interested in sociology.)</p>

<p>Mind, I don’t necessarily agree with every single tiny point made by Kaminer, but I think her overall argument holds some merit.</p>

<p>[The</a> Trouble With Single-Sex Schools - 98.04](<a href=“http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/98apr/singsex.htm]The”>The Trouble With Single-Sex Schools - 98.04)</p>

55

<p>Maybe you just don’t get it? If you are having such a dilemma about whether or not a women’s school is right for you, or for women in general, then you just don’t get it. And frankly, I’d be surprised if you are admitted. </p>

<p>Martha Stewart, Hillary Clinton, Anna Quindlen, Barbara Walters, Madeline Albright, Emily Dickinson, Diane Sawyer, Betty Friedan, Katherine Hepburn, Drew Gilpin Faust, Julia Child, Pamela Melroy, Harriet Smith O’Neill, Nettie Stevens, Kimberly Peirce, Margaret Mead, Jackie Kennedy, Meryl Streep, Sylvia Plath, Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagan, Helen Keller, Zora Neale Hurston, Suzanne Vega, Laurie Anderson, Banazir Bhutto, Yolanda King, Gertrude Stein, Gloria Steinem, Frances Perkins, Elizabeth Holloway Marsten, and Grace Hopper. These are but a few notable women who are alumnae of all-women colleges. Look them up.</p>

<p>I say, don’t knock it until you try it. But go ahead, keep arguing about the statistics. Have fun as a middle manager. And yes, I’d like fries with that.</p>

56

<p>Maybe I just don’t get it–you’re right, I don’t. Which is why I’m here and why I started this thread. But that has no bearing upon my chances of acceptance; even supporters of women’s colleges don’t try to argue that they are as selective as their academic coed peers.</p>

<p>If I cared, I could produce an equally illustrious list of alumni from coed colleges; a huge list proves only that women’s colleges are good schools–DUH.</p>

<p>Something else that occurred to me: shouldn’t women’s colleges properly be compared to coed colleges on an equal basis? I.e. including the male alumni of coed colleges? Coed schools are not founded to educate women, but to educate both men and women (in many cases, right from the beginning).</p>

<p>Of course women’s colleges will leave you with far less chance of failure than their peers. The school matters more than the individual, and you can do everything that other people have just because you’ll have the same alma mater. [/sarcasm]</p>

57

<p>Keil, I have to say, I think you have a really bad attitude and it’s very offputting for people in these forums who really are doing their best to offer you advice. You solicit opinions, and then you insult them because they aren’t exactly what you seem to be looking for (whatever that is). </p>

<p>I think the truth is that you’re not cut out to attend a women’s college, as many people are not. You should just attend a co-ed school and spare us your adolescent sarcasm and rudeness.</p>

58

<p>OP said: “A single-sex education doesn’t stop the glass ceiling from existing; it just gives women tools to fight it and raise it. I think I can do that by myself, thank you very much.”</p>

<p>OP-</p>

<p>I think your basic argument is incomplete and limited, since by implication it rests on comparing the relative virtues of co-ed or single sex colleges.</p>

<p>Examine instead this question: is the system of higher education in the US better served by eliminating single sex institutions? </p>

<p>The analogous question I would ask is ecological: would one be more likely or less likely to fully develop the academic potential of women by eliminating women’s colleges? </p>

<p>Seems to me that the persistence of highly selective single sex institutions and the success of its graduates is an indicator that they provide added value to higher education. In that sense you misread the comment that listed the prominent graduates of women’s colleges: in addition to showing that those institutions are of good quality, it also indicates that single sex institutions are a successful part of a system that produces successful scholars and leaders. </p>

<p>Take that path away . . . and perhaps all those women who sought that kind of institution would flourish. But perhaps not. That is the risk one takes in ending single sex institutions.</p>

<p>You made that case yourself earlier in the thread: the educational system is flexible enough that you can choose co-ed based on your personal needs. Other women feel differently: that they are more likely to be able to fully develop themselevs in a single sex school.</p>

<p>I’d further argue that there is nothing to be gained by eliminating single sex institutions. There are a great many co-ed institutions where that kind of education can be pursued. Unless one can make the case that single sex institutions provide precisely NO benefit, ending them would reduce the system’s ability to provide good education.</p>

<p>Kei</p>

59

<p>I’ve been polite throughout this thread until I was insulted and patronized in post #55. Please excuse my finite amount of patience. I came here for a productive debate, using my own honest doubts as a jumping-off point, not to hear blather about how women’s colleges can do no wrong–I think they are wonderful institutions that offer certain unique benefits, but that they also offer certain unique flaws. I had hoped that some people, even those who “believe” more in women’s colleges than I do, would also acknowledge the shades of gray inherent here.</p>

<p>Kei - I have never made the case for elimination of single-sex institutions; I simply challenge the notion that a woman who chooses not to attend a women’s college is automatically giving up some sense of future self-worth or opportunity. Women’s colleges are the BEST educational option for SOME women, including many that I know and respect personally; but I don’t think this necessarily means that coed colleges are a WORSE educational option for ALL women.</p>

60

<p>I don’t think anyone here thinks that a women’s college can “do no wrong” but you did ask them to defend women’s colleges, so they’re defending them. If you wanted people to express more nuanced opinions, you shouldn’t have chosen a thread title that would automatically put people on the defensive. </p>

<p>Also, I don’t know where you got this notion that you seem so intent on challenging. Or what exactly you expect the product of this “debate” to be. What is your ultimate goal that you’re trying to get at? Are you asking us to convince you that women’s colleges are a good idea for you? I think after four pages of attempts, it’s pretty clear that you are not cut out to be a women’s college student. That’s fine, there are plenty of other co-ed colleges you can attend where you will probably be perfectly happy. Women’s colleges aren’t for you. I would look elsewhere.</p>