Why All Women's Schools: The SMITH Experience (REVISITED)

Colleges and Universities A-Z Smith College
1

<p>I came across many interesting articles recently speaking in contradiction to my earlier thesis and statements regarding how women are treated in secondary schools and colleges. It appears that women have taken the lead when it comes to admissions and grades in secondary schools and colleges. mea culpa! However, I still find some facts rather interesting.... you knew I would, didn't you? Besides, I wanted to become a senior member of CC with an interesting post, not just a response. Here we go!</p>

<p>Over the past two decades, the rates at which women have enrolled in undergraduate education and attained college degrees increased faster than those of men. Part of this increase may be related to an increase in the percentage of traditional students who were women. However, women are still overrepresented among nontraditional students such as adult students with families, students in the lowest income level, and students age 40 or older.</p>

<p>When looking at changes in high school academic preparation among 1982 and 1992 high school graduates who entered postsecondary education within 2 years of high school completion, women had closed some existing gender gaps and, in some cases, surpassed men over the 10-year period. Also, in the later cohort, among students who had higher levels of high school academic preparation, women were more likely than men to earn a bachelor's degree—a difference not found in the earlier cohort. In other words, women not only narrowed the gender gap in high school academic preparation, but even among those best prepared to enter college, women were more likely than men to attain a bachelor's degree.</p>

<p>Over the past decade, although women have surpassed men in some aspects of academic preparation and college persistence and attainment, as of 2001, their full-time earnings were lower than those of men. Even when controlling for undergraduate field of study, men earned higher salaries than women in several fields—including the combined field of mathematics, science, and engineering, as well as the field comprising humanities, and social and behavioral sciences—indicating that some of the gains women made in postsecondary education may not be realized off campus.</p>

<p>This is bothersome to me. Realizing that women have made great strides in the classroom, they have been and continue to be lagging behind greatly in the area of compensation even after receiving an equal or better education. This is a solid reason that we stand behind all-women's schools and their belief that women will someday overtake the "old boys network" which strongly exists today.</p>

2

<p>What other factors were taken into consideration? Many a time, women's earnings come out to be lower than that of a man due to the fact that she took time off to start and care for the family. My friend's mom, for example, took time off to take care of the family and it took her five years to find a suitable job (she didn't want to work hourly jobs, etc.) and obviously, her income during her lifetime would be lower than her husband's. </p>

<p>I don't mean to be overly argumentative or anything, but I'm not sure if there's anything to do about it shy of forbidding women to not have kids and to work.</p>

3

<p>Absolutely a valid point, and someone was bound to make it. Below are some stats to help understand the issue. Although some women started with part-time jobs, and some started families after college; there is still the issue of gender discrimination when both sexes enter the workforce. Men traditionally have, and continue to, make more money after leaving college than women do. Unfortunately, the trends continue, and appear to be worsening. The stats have nothing to do with family rearing or starting jobs later in life.</p>

<p>The majority of 1992–93 and 1999–2000 bachelor's degree recipients were employed 1 year after graduation. However, for both cohorts of college graduates, men were more likely than women to be working full time, while women were more likely than men to be working part time. For example, among 1999–2000 bachelor's degree recipients, 81 percent of men versus 74 percent of women were working full time, and 9 percent of men versus 13 percent of women were working part time. Over the period studied, the unemployment rate for men did not change statistically (4.8 to 5.9 percent), while it increased for women (from 4.4 to 6.3 percent) Still, for the most recent cohort, no difference could be detected between men and women in the unemployment rate for bachelor's degree recipients.</p>

<p>Among bachelor's degree recipients who were employed full time 1 year after graduation in 1994 and 2001, women earned lower average annual salaries than men in both cohorts. On average, women earned $5,100 less than men or 84 percent of male salaries in 1994, and $6,800 less or 83 percent of male salaries in 2001 (in constant 2001 dollars). Moreover, in 2001, 31 percent of men earned $45,000 or more, compared with 12 percent of men in 1994. In contrast, 14 percent of women earned $45,000 or more in 2001, compared with 7 percent in 1994. Thus in both 1994 and 2001, proportionally more men earned salaries of $45,000 or higher than women.</p>

<p>Even when controlling for undergraduate field of study, men earned higher average annual salaries than women in at least one-half of the fields examined. For example, in both cohorts, men who majored in engineering, mathematics, and science fields earned higher average full-time annual salaries than women who majored in these fields ($33,300 vs. $27,900 in 1994 and $45,200 vs. $34,200 in 2001). In other words, in 1994 women with degrees in these fields earned, on average, $5,400 less than men, or about 84 percent of what men earned, and 7 years later in 2001, women earned $11,000 less or 76 percent of what men earned. Additionally, in 2001, men who majored in fields related to humanities and social/behavioral science or health, vocational/technical, and other technical/professional fields earned higher annual average salaries than their female counterparts, while such a difference was not detected in 1994.</p>

4

<p>This is one gender gap that will appear never to close if we measure the gap with incomplete measures on the statistics. As theothermuse points out women are more free now to make their own choices. One of those choices is not to work or to work shorter hours. In my field there are no women who put in as many hours as I do. This is not always by their choice, although it is in most cases. Some do not have the spousal support to tolerate an 80 hour work week or to pick up the slack at home. In some of the higher paid areas in science the hours are long. The company or university is really paying for two people: the scientist and the spouse who picks up the slack. The women I know who are the happiest married wisely. It is not necessarily dependent upon where they work, probably because women are a little wiser at looking into some of these lifestyle issues before they sign on the dotted line.</p>

5

<p>That's a really interesting study. Could you please post where you found it? I'd like to read it.</p>

6

<p>The Opt-out issue is quite real and unless the stats take that into consideration -they don't mean very much</p>

<p><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/@@yDY@AYcQpimORxAA/magazine/content/05_13/b3926036_mz007.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.businessweek.com/@@yDY@AYcQpimORxAA/magazine/content/05_13/b3926036_mz007.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

7

<p>The study that the stats come from may take that into consideration, but it's impossible to tell without a citation.</p>

<p>BJM - could you please cite the study(s) that your stats are from?</p>

8

<p>Sure:</p>

<p><a href="http://nces.ed.gov/das/epubs/2005169/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://nces.ed.gov/das/epubs/2005169/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Citationx - the stats do take that into consideration. Any valid research would incorporate that into their data first. I'm not talking about women opting out of the workforce, I'm talking about why women make less money than men in the workforce; particularly in the hard sciences.</p>

9

<p>Median Earnings of Young Females:</p>

<p>Among young adults with a bachelor’s or higher degree, females earn about 78 percent of what males earn.
Among full-time year-round wage and salary workers
in 2000, the median annual earnings of young
adult females were generally lower than those of
their male peers with similar educational attainments.
For instance, females ages 25-34 with a
high school diploma had median earnings of
$21,411 in 2000, compared to $29,443 earned
by their male peers. Similarly, among those with
a bachelor’s or higher degree, females earned
$36,353 per year, while males earned $46,431.
Although the earnings gaps between young males
and females persisted through 2000, they were
narrower compared to 1970. In 1970, females
ages 25-34 whose highest credential was a high
school diploma had median annual earnings that
were equivalent to 63 percent of the earnings of
their male peers. By 2000, this percentage had
risen to 73 percent. Similarly, among those with
a bachelor’s or higher degree, females’ median
annual earnings as a percentage of males’ earnings
rose from 71 percent in 1970 to 78 percent
in 2000. Still, males with bachelor’s degrees earned
more than females with master’s degrees.
More educated females generally earned more
than females with lower attainment, the exception
being that no differences were detected
between those at the master’s and first-professional
degree levels.</p>

<p><a href="http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005016.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005016.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

10

<p>Although female college graduates shared in the earnings growth
of all college graduates in the 1980s, they earned less on average
than male college graduates. </p>

<p>Among employed recent science and engineering bachelor’s
degree recipients, women were less likely than men to be
employed in science and engineering occupations.28 For example,
18 percent of employed recent female science and engineering
graduates were employed in science and engineering occupations
in 1993, compared to 35 percent of their male counterparts.
18
Female field concentration ratio of graduate degrees
conferred: Academic years ending 1971, 1982, and 1994
Field of study 1971 1982 1994
Master’s degrees
Life sciences 0.76 0.69 0.92
Physical sciences* 0.23 0.27 0.35
Mathematics 0.56 0.43 0.51
Computer sciences and engineering 0.03 0.14 0.19
Computer sciences 0.17 0.35 0.29
Engineering 0.02 0.10 0.15
Doctor’s degrees
Life sciences 1.17 0.87 1.09
Physical sciences* 0.36 0.34 0.44
Mathematics 0.50 0.33 0.45
Computer sciences and engineering 0.04 0.13 0.21
Computer sciences 0.14 0.19 0.29
Engineering 0.04 0.12 0.20
*Includes fields such as physics, chemistry, astronomy, and geology.</p>

<p>• The salary differential between women and
men in comparable scientific jobs is still evident.
There remains an earnings gap between men and women in comparable
scientific positions. Among more experienced bachelor’s
and master’s scientists and engineers, the gap between men’s
and women’s salaries is larger than for recent graduates.29 Some
of the difference in salary is due to differences in the field in
which they are employed. Salaries are highest in
mathematics/computer science and engineering, fields in which
women are not highly represented. Such factors as the number of
years in the labor force, primary work activity, supervisory status,
and number of people supervised also influence salaries and
may account for some of the gap.</p>

<p>• Among recent college graduates who majored
in the natural sciences, women earned less
than men did. There was no measurable difference
between the starting salaries of men
and women who majored in computer sciences
and engineering, however.
College graduates who majored in computer sciences and engineering
had much higher starting salaries than did all college
graduates. On the other hand, graduates who majored in the natural
sciences or mathematics earned less than the typical graduate
did. Although median starting salaries for 1993 female recent
graduates were substantially lower than those of male graduates,
there was no measurable difference between the starting salaries
of men and women who majored in computer science and engineering.
Women who majored in the natural sciences earned 15
percent less than men who majored in the same field, however.</p>

<p><a href="http://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97982.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97982.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

11

<p>However one might look at this study it does not show any evidence of disparity in income that cannot be attributed to the field of employment as opposed to the field of study.</p>

<p>-Women with degrees in science congregate in lower paying jobs such as education and the life sciences.</p>

<p>-Men congregate in higher paying jobs such as engineering and computer science.</p>

<p>-There is no measurable difference in income for women and men who chose computer science and engineering. One would probably find the same thing on a field by field analysis. A female math potdosc or associate professor employed by a university would have the same income as her male counterpart wih the same experience.</p>

<p>-Half as many women stick to careers in the sciences as compared to men, making any income comparison based on field of study only largely meaningless.</p>

12

<p>**Women with degrees in science congregate in lower paying jobs such as education and the life sciences.</p>

<p>-Men congregate in higher paying jobs such as engineering and computer science.**</p>

<p>Thanks for making my point; therefore not rendering the study meaningless. Why do you think your statement above is true? Isn't that the kind of trend that women's schools are successful in overcoming?</p>

13

<p>"Thanks for making my point; therefore not rendering the study meaningless. Why do you think your statement above is true? Isn't that the kind of trend that women's schools are successful in overcoming?"</p>

<p>Men want to go into those fields. Women don't. That hardly provides a basis for your argument. This would prove that women's schools are more successful than coed schools at sending women into higher paying fields but doesn't prove that women make less money than men despite equal education, training, etc.</p>

14

<p>I have not seen any evidence that women with undergraduate degrees in science (or in any other field for that matter) from women's colleges make more money than their female counterparts with comparable degrees from coed schools. </p>

<p>Out of law school, fewer women than men go into private practice as opposed to public service which pays less. That is generally a choice which involves considerations such as length of workweek, interest in social issues in addition to income potential.</p>

<p>Similarly, out of medical school women tend to pick specialties that have shorter residencies but also pay less such as pediatrics or family medicine. Is there any evidence that women's colleges steer a greater percentage of their graduates to pursue specialties such as surgery? </p>

<p>If anything I would not be surprised if the data showed just the opposite i.e. that women's college graduates make less than their coed counterparts. Women's colleges tend to produce graduates with a strong sense of civic responsibility and involvement in the community which is highly commendable. Many pursue careers in education, public health or civil service which do not pay as much as careers in the private sector. This is again by choice.</p>

<p>I don't believe the women's colleges see as their mission to provide their graduates with pre-professional training for higher earning careers in business or engineering. The curriculum is decidely 'liberal arts" at most schools. </p>

<p>It will be interesting to see if the creation of an engineering department at Smith will incite more women to go after (and stay in) careers in computer science for instance as compared to coed engineering schools.</p>

15

<p>It will be interesting to see if the creation of an engineering department at Smith will incite more women to go after (and stay in) careers in computer science for instance as compared to coed engineering schools.</p>

<p>I agree with this statement. It will be interesting to see in the long run how these women do in the field. The engineering major at Smith is already listed as one of the best in the nation, so it could be very promising.</p>

<p>My arguement was never that women's colleges see as their mission to provide their graduates with pre-professional training for higher earning careers in business or engineering. Just that they prepare women in very different ways than most coed schools do. Being in an all-women's environment (for those who choose to attend) is enlightening in many ways, and provides the students with a feeling of security in who they are and what they can become. It's an empowering environment; and I believe, one which allows women to go into the workforce with confidence that they can achieve in fields primarily lead by men, such as the hard sciences.</p>

16

<p>For those still in denial that women make less in the workplace regardless of education, background, or status; here's some interesting articles from Cornell.
<a href="http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/iww/downloads/files/acrummysituation.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/iww/downloads/files/acrummysituation.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/iww/downloads/files/WomenAndSocialSecurity.doc%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/iww/downloads/files/WomenAndSocialSecurity.doc&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

17

<p>Here's a little data that speaks to why women's colleges do support the belief of an ageless women's network. There is a distinct difference between 4 year women's colleges and 4 year private coed colleges in preparing women in the areas regularly dominated by men.</p>

<p>Special Circumstances Continue to Make Women’s Colleges Attractive to Female Students </p>

<p>Traditionally male-dominated fields include mathematics, computer sciences, and physical sciences. There is evidence that when private 4-year women’s colleges were compared with all private 4-year institutions by Carnegie classification, they conferred upon women equal or larger proportions of bachelor’s degrees in traditionally male-dominated fields than the norm for private 4-year colleges within their Carnegie classification. However, there is more dramatic evidence that women are represented in greater numbers in the professional staffs and faculty of women’s colleges than at similar institutions of higher education. For Fall 1993, women were over 70 percent of all executive, administrative, and managerial positions at women’s colleges, and were over half of all full-time and part-time faculty, these were much higher percentages than the norm for private 4-year colleges within each Carnegie classification. Also, as full-time faculty at women’s colleges, women received higher average salaries than women at similar institutions of higher education. </p>

<p>The Institutional Effects of Women’s Colleges </p>

<p>Some research on women’s colleges includes findings that these colleges encourage leadership skills in women, provide women with more female role models, and that they encourage women to focus on traditionally male-dominated fields of study. However, other research finds that factors such as the level of selectivity of the college may play a part in the institution’s positive effects on students. </p>

<p>A review of the research on women’s colleges reveals that this research focuses primarily on studying the effects of attending a single-sex institution on the educational outcomes and career aspirations of young women. Much of this research seeks to ascertain differences between women who chose women’s colleges and those who attend coeducational institutions.</p>

18

<p>Here's an interesting article about a study at Indiana University that finds women's colleges are better equipped to meet the needs of female students.</p>

<p><a href="http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/3705.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/3705.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Special Circumstances Continue to Make Women’s Colleges Attractive to Female Students </p>

<p>Traditionally male-dominated fields include mathematics, computer sciences, and physical sciences. There is evidence that when private 4-year women’s colleges were compared with all private 4-year institutions by Carnegie classification, they conferred upon women equal or larger proportions of bachelor’s degrees in traditionally male-dominated fields than the norm for private 4-year colleges within their Carnegie classification. However, there is more dramatic evidence that women are represented in greater numbers in the professional staffs and faculty of women’s colleges than at similar institutions of higher education. For Fall 1993, women were over 70 percent of all executive, administrative, and managerial positions at women’s colleges, and were over half of all full-time and part-time faculty, these were much higher percentages than the norm for private 4-year colleges within each Carnegie classification. Also, as full-time faculty at women’s colleges, women received higher average salaries than women at similar institutions of higher education. </p>

<p>The Institutional Effects of Women’s Colleges </p>

<p>Some research on women’s colleges includes findings that these colleges encourage leadership skills in women, provide women with more female role models, and that they encourage women to focus on traditionally male-dominated fields of study.
A review of the research on women’s colleges reveals that this research focuses primarily on studying the effects of attending a single-sex institution on the educational outcomes and career aspirations of young women. Much of this research seeks to ascertain differences between women who chose women’s colleges and those who attend coeducational institutions.</p>

19

<p><a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/04/yes_to_womens_colleges/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Op-ed+columns%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/04/yes_to_womens_colleges/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Op-ed+columns&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Interesting article from Simmon's president</p>

20

<p><a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/04/yes_to_womens_colleges/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Op-ed+columns%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/04/yes_to_womens_colleges/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Op-ed+columns&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Interesting article from Simmon's president.
As well as this info:</p>

<p>Women's college graduates make up only two percent of the college-educated population, and yet: </p>

<p>One-third of the women board members of the Fortune 1000 companies are women's college graduates.
Women's college graduates are twice as likely to earn Ph.D.s. A higher percentage go on to study in the sciences and attend medical school.
Of Business Week's 50 highest ranking women in corporate America, 30 percent are women's college graduates.
Of 61 women members of Congress, 20 percent attended women's colleges.</p>