<p>Okay, I seriously don't understand why people would want to go to a college comprised only of girls. I think it would drive me nuts. What are the advantages? Am I missing something?!</p>
<p>You can research what each college has to offer yourself.</p>
<p>Studies have found that, by attending women's colleges, women:</p>
<pre><code>* Participate more fully in and out of class.
* Are more successful in careers; that is, they tend to hold higher positions, are happier, and earn more money.
* Constitute more than 20% of women in Congress, and 30% of a Business Week list of rising women stars in Corporate America, yet only represent 2% of all female college graduates.
* Have a higher percentage of majors in economics, math and life science today than men at coeducational colleges.
* Have more opportunities to hold leadership positions and are able to observe women functioning in top jobs (90% of the presidents and 55% of the faculty are women).
* Report greater satisfaction than their coed counterparts with their college experience in almost all measures - academically, developmentally, and personally.
* Continue toward doctorates in math, science and engineering in disproportionately large numbers.
* Are three times more likely to earn a baccalaureate degree in economics and one and one-half times more likely to earn baccalaureates degrees in life sciences, physical sciences and mathematics than at a coeducational institution.
* Develop measurably higher levels of self-esteem than other achieving women in coeducational institutions. After two years in coeducational institutions, women have been shown to have lower levels of self-esteem than when they entered college.
* Score higher on standardized achievement tests.
* Tend to choose traditionally male disciplines, like the sciences, as their academic majors, in greater numbers.
* Are more likely to graduate.
* Tend to be more involved in philanthropic activities after college.
</code></pre>
<h1>OF BUSINESS WEEK'S list of the 50 women who are rising stars in corporate America, 15, or 30%, received their baccalaureate degree from a women's college. Since women's college graduates account for less than 4% of college-educated women, they are over-represented on this list by a factor of 6 to 1.</h1>
<h1>One-third (33%) of the women board members of the 1992 Fortune 1000 companies are women's college graduates.</h1>
<h1>Of the 4,012 highest paid officers and directors of 1990 Fortune 1000 companies, 19, or less than one-half of 1%, were women. Of these women, 36% are women's college graduates.</h1>
<h1>Of 60 women members of Congress, 12, or 20%, attended women's colleges.</h1>
<h1>One of every seven cabinet members in state government attended a women's college.</h1>
<h1>In a 1997 magazine survey, 20% of the 100 most powerful women in Washington, D.C., attended women's colleges.</h1>
<h1>Graduates of women's colleges are more than twice as likely as graduates of coeducational colleges to receive doctorate degrees, and to enter medical school and receive doctorates in the natural sciences.</h1>
<h1>20% of women identified by Black Enterprise Magazine, as the 20 most powerful African-American women in corporate America, graduated from women's colleges. Of those, three came from Simmons College.</h1>
<h1>Nearly three-quarters of the women's college graduates are in the work force.</h1>
<h1>Almost half of the graduates in the work force hold traditionally male-dominated jobs at the higher end of the pay scale such as lawyer, physician or manager.</h1>
<h1>Nearly half of the graduates have earned advanced degrees, while 81% have continued their education beyond college.</h1>
<h1>9 out of 10 women's college alumnae have participated in at least one civic or professional organization since college.</h1>
<h1>More than three-quarters of the alumnae surveyed are, or have been, married, and half have children.</h1>
<h1>14% of Good Housekeeping's list of "100 Outstanding Women Graduates," are graduates from women's colleges.</h1>
<p>What they don't have: football; a lot of vomiting in hallways; binge drinking rates 50-60% lower than comparable co-ed schools.</p>
<p>They are clearly not for everyone (they don't allow men ;)) And they have no girls; only women.</p>
<p>I think mini summed that up. I recently toured and interviewed at Barnard, Smith and Mount Holyoke. I was certainly wary of women's colleges and the seemingly unnatural notion of four years with solely women and subsequent entrance to a male/female workforce. However, after visiting, I was completely won over. Brown and Georgetown, while I love them, have lost that gleam they once bore in my eyes.</p>
<p>Aside from the straight-up statistics (which are astounding) of women's colleges, the sheer enthusiasm and ambition of the women I met while touring was striking. The atmosphere is incredibly comfortable, an unparalleled sense of community prevails, all within a very rigourous academic climate. Don't be fooled by acceptance percentages in the 40s and 50s, those who apply are a self-selecting group aside from being entirely women. The teaching and commitment is superb (oodles of research and intern opportunities). And alumnae rave, rave, about their alma maters. It's the people and the energy of the schools which is captivating. Even though I have a shot at Brown and Georgetown, I find myself gravitating to the women's colleges. </p>
<p>It is not for everyone. Women's colleges are not something you should casually tack on your list and apply to. I highly recommend visiting, and most of them strongly recommend interviewing too.</p>
<p>They make a better quality LAC education available to those whose stats might not get them into the very top LACs.</p>
<p>Or did. (Mine very happily turned down Williams for Smith, and a year later is very pleased about her decision. There are things she has been able to do at Smith that she couldn't have dreamed about at my alma mater.)</p>
<p>I am not too certain the women attending women's colleges are receiving a "better quality" education in light of what they could have had. It isn't a matter of second best or a lack of access to better LACs. Wellesley is right up there, but it's too close to home for me. </p>
<p>Personally, in addition to Georgetown and Brown, I know I have a good shot at the very top LACs (MHC and Smith are right up there too), but I would honestly choose a women's college like Smith over another LAC even if it did have better stats or rankings or whatever. </p>
<p>Women's colleges are kind of in a league of their own really. Apples to oranges sometimes. It really is a unique experience, opening doors unavailable otherwise, in once more, a wonderful academic climate. The applicant to a women's college is incredibly devoted to academics and community service (they aren't there to meet boys, keg parties on the weekend--not that everyone is obviously) and perhaps don't find fixating on standardized tests a worthy plan of action in getting into colleges. </p>
<p>Like mini said, I know a handful of girls accepted to Amherst, Middlebury and elsewhere who opted for Smith and Bryn Mawr.</p>
<p>I am not questioning the advantages of women's colleges. My Aunt was a graduate of Smith and she loved it.</p>
<p>But, if there are so many advantages, why have enrollments in women's colleges declined over the last three decades or so? Why have so many gone coed? A college near Ithaca (Wells) was having enrollment troubles so they went coed this year and the enrollment went up significantly. </p>
<p>My theory is that the environment for women at coed colleges has improved. Women seem to have greater success at coed colleges than men (e.g. higher graduation rates, higher gpas). Women seem to flourish at coed colleges, too.</p>
<p>Wells does not offer the academic quality of the "seven sisters".</p>
<p>On our tour of Bryn Mawr another advantage was mentioned --the bathrooms are much cleaner and more pleasant to use than at places with coed housing.</p>
<p>I like the sound of a women's college, but i've always been kind of a tomboy. I don't like the clothes-obsessed fashion police culture the girls have at my high school. Would going to an all women's college be even worse for me? I ilke the sound of everything else they have to offer, thuogh.</p>
<p>"My theory is that the environment for women at coed colleges has improved. Women seem to have greater success at coed colleges than men (e.g. higher graduation rates, higher gpas). Women seem to flourish at coed colleges, too."</p>
<p>It's hard to know. Wellesley and Smith now consistently surpass Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, etc. in the number and percentage of Fulbrights awarded (and more percentagewise than HYP - for undergrads). I don't at all think that is because of the quality of the students, nor necessarily because of the quality of education (all of these schools are wonderful, and draw their faculty from the same pool.). I think it does have something to do with the quality of advising (which at the women's colleges is a huge thing), and that little extra oomph in self-assuredness that seems to come to young women from not having to share the spotlight with men. At any rate, that seems to be what the women's college surveys seem to report, but there is really no good way to compare - you only get to attend one college!</p>
<p>Enrollments at Smith, Wellesley, and Mt. Holyoke are signficantly higher than they were several decades ago. The most significant differences they have from AWS, other than the fact that they are all women, lies in the fact that they have substantially larger percentages of Pell Grant recipients, coming from families with incomes below $40k. At Smith, it is almost 3x times that at Williams, and more than 2x that at Swarthmore. So an interesting and unanswerable question is how well these same students would have done had they been at AWS. For the past decade, Amherst has been experimenting with just this question, and with equally remarkable results.</p>
<p>The vast majority of students at the women's colleges consistently report that they hadn't really thought about attending a women's college initially, and weren't really looking for one. If you look at the viewbooks, they basically look like the other LACs, just without male faces (and no football), or at least that's what they looked like to my d. They do seem rather majorly different when you visit, which is pretty much a must if you are considering attending..</p>
<p>Also, it's worth noting Smith's PRAXIS program here, which is a very innovative internship system which offers all students awesome jobs with stipe-ends. This goes hand in hand with that spectacular advising and very close relationships with advisors. I am but a rising senior, but it's a wave that's swept me. And being on campus, there is just a vibe.</p>
<p>Some formerly all-female schools may have gone co-ed, but I honestly don't surmise Smith, MHC, Barnard, Bryn Mawr and Wellesley doing so in the future. Women's colleges will survive I think. They may wax and wane at times in those applying, but I honestly believe in the benefits of an education there. Not only are most of the schools on the small end, but everyone is remarkably friendly, and the student bodies are INCREDIBLY diverse. MHC has an international student population of 15%--which is the highest of any LAC in the nation, in addition to most of the schools having substantially higher African American and Latina percentages of students. </p>
<p>The women are just that much more motivated, self-aware...it's hard to explain. </p>
<p>There was an interesting, somewhat related article this morning in the Boston Globe Magazine insert discussing economic diversity on campuses which ties in with Pell Grants. Out of a study of the nation's top 40 universities (and I know this doesn't quite apply with LACs) but, out of this pool, Harvard ranked 39th, Princeton 38th and Yale 25th (With 1 being the BEST in economic diversity, as in accepting kids with Pell Grants, those in need of lots of aid).</p>
<p>And to respond to soccerfanatic's question...(even though I am still in HS)...women at women's colleges are not clothes-obsessed, fashion magnets, superficial clique-y types, clearly with exceptions along the way. And depending on which women's college you are looking at. But, by and large, the women are there to work hard, not socialize and participate in let's see who can put together the cutest outfit. They seem to have a good time, great friendships built, no doubt. But I think you'll find much less of the high school behavior in women's colleges than in regular schools. People are much more accepting, open to others and less judgemental. Very welcoming.</p>
<p>"# OF BUSINESS WEEK'S list of the 50 women who are rising stars in corporate America, 15, or 30%, received their baccalaureate degree from a women's college. Since women's college graduates account for less than 4% of college-educated women, they are over-represented on this list by a factor of 6 to 1.</p>
<h1>One-third (33%) of the women board members of the 1992 Fortune 1000 companies are women's college graduates.</h1>
<h1>Of the 4,012 highest paid officers and directors of 1990 Fortune 1000 companies, 19, or less than one-half of 1%, were women. Of these women, 36% are women's college graduates.</h1>
<h1>Of 60 women members of Congress, 12, or 20%, attended women's colleges."</h1>
<p>Many of these numbers can be explained because at the time most of those women were going to school, most coed Universities were either still all male, or were still majority male, which didn't appeal to all women. Just a thought. ;)</p>
<p>If you're really wary about having no male interaction, consider a place like Barnard. It's affiliated with Columbia, and from what I gather you take around half your classes at Columbia, so there's plenty of male interaction. Plus, it's in NYC. No shortage of males there ;-).</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>It's affiliated with Columbia, and from what I gather you take around half your classes at Columbia, so there's plenty of male interaction.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Yes, in their roadshow presentations, Barnard sells the Columbia connection to the hilt. Their motto should be "We're Almost Columbia." Which always raised the question with me: Okay, why not just go to Columbia?</p>
<p>The appeal is they are easier to get into than other schools of similar calibre.</p>
<p>We have 3 daughters. The older 2 attend(ed) an all girl secondary school. D1 opted for an coed experience for college. In 2 yrs, D2 will likely do the same. We are hoping that D3, who attends a coed secondary school, will be excited about Smith. It is such a supportive community.</p>
<p>This may be a sensitive topic: lesbianism. I had heard that there was an active, vocal lesbian community at and around Smith. Is that myth or reality? If so, is that also true at other seven sisters? Is it any different from the gay/lesbian communities that exist at almost all other colleges? (i.e. is it more numerous, vocal, militant, overt, and so on) </p>
<p>I ask this because I think it crosses the minds of applicants. It might be helpful perhaps if someone could address this question. For some reason, I think it is a concern about some all-women's colleges (but not a concern about women's colleges that have a religious affiliation and not a concern about the gay community at predominantly men's colleges. Am I wrong about this?</p>
<p>There is a vocal lesbian presence at the women's colleges--a prospective student should be gay-tolerant but the majority are, nevertheless, heterosexual. </p>
<p>The special atmosphere really comes close to a kind of "sisterhood and mutual acceptance" that is not present or much diluted in coed situations.</p>
<p>On a day-to-day basis most women at women's colleges dress for comfort or to meet their personal aesthetic standards. When we visited Barnard everyone seemed to be in casual slacks and sweatshirt mode. On the Columbia campus there were many more women "dressed for success" of one kind or another."</p>
<p>"Which always raised the question with me: Okay, why not just go to Columbia?"</p>
<p>Because you want a liberal arts college with an attentive administration, the history of a women's college, the old girls' network of alumnae, a more cohesive community (and that fabulous special atmosphere), no Core curriculum, higher quality/less diluted student services, resources and opportunities designed with women only in mind, a thorough advising system, its own set of doofy traditions... etc., etc., etc.</p>
<p>Why would a girl not just go to Barnard? ;)</p>
<p>(but the proportion of classes Barnard girls take is on average about 1/3 at Columbia. Same for the reverse case.)</p>