<p>Due to the absence of tons of guys on campus, there isn't a queen bee/wannabe dynamic at Smith.</p>
<p>Yes, the depth of engagement with classes and profs is something to marvel at. Lots of one-on-one's...one of the profs was just down in D.C. having conferences with the interns and reviewing their thesis papers to date, lots of thoughtful time spent there.</p>
<p>After hearing D's assessments of the character of some of the guys she's met in D.C., I think the guys are lucky she's at a womens college. ("Dad, he's very nice, very funny, but <em>so</em> unfocused and irresponsible....")</p>
<p>My Smith '06 D would NEVER have considered a single-sex school had she not spent a month at Smith in a summer program for high school girls. She fell in love with the school then and never found another place for college that could match it (for her needs, at least).</p>
<p>Re guys, she just had to dismiss the old idea of expecting to meet a potential life mate in college (as had happened with her dad and me). </p>
<p>Fortunately, she prioritized personal development ahead of potential mate-finding.</p>
<p>The only five-college class she ended up taking off Smith's campus was a weekly seminar at UMass that was a follow-up to an abroad J-term in which she had participated. Other than that, she was happy taking her classes at her own campus. </p>
<p>She did tell me that the debate team was a Smith group that had plenty of exposure to "appropriate" male social "prospects" through tournaments at other schools where the debate teams were heavily male. </p>
<p>The Glee Club also did partnerships with male choral groups from other schools (U Penn, Annapolis, U Mich...). Social interaction (including reciprocal hostings) were a part of the program. </p>
<p>(I suspect that the Smith on-campus mixers did not tend to attract guys with "the best of intentions.") </p>
<p>I was just as happy having her have those college years to focus on herself, and supportive friends, rather than being caught up in a romantic relationship. </p>
<p>She is now involved in a career that is heavily male and is, I think, well prepared for it. </p>
<p>As for queen bees, I am unaware of any such phenomenon at Smith. There is so much respect for individual differences there that no one "type" could be expected to "rule."</p>
<p>meeting men can definitely be a struggle for the smithies who are looking for that...but i do like to tell the story of one of my friends from the class of '04, who went to a Quad party on 'immorality weekend' (a time when many houses throw parties). she wasn't planning to do anything other than dance and hang out with friends. </p>
<p>that guy cracking jokes in the corner with his buddies? now (that he's graduated from amherst and almost done with yale med, of course) he's her husband. so it can happen.</p>
<p>Yes, Jyber, I suspect that a lot of the guys show up at the Quad Parties without what we might regard as the best intentions. I suspect mileage varies among the women, though....</p>
<p>Since it's just us chickens in this relative backwater portion of CC, I will say that I've been musing on my D in light of her social and personal development. The past six months, in particular, have been startling. I have read the Tarot and cast the I Ching...I fear my D may have to work some to find a compatible male whom she does not intimidate. She has always been bright but she is adding increased perception and assertiveness to go with it...I will not fear if she winds up working in a male-dominated environment at all and indeed she seems to take glee in the no-holds barred environment in which she currently finds herself. But I think it takes a strong & secure guy to deal with that socially. </p>
<p>Now, TheMom and I both married in our early 30's but that is not for everyone...and it just took us that long to develop ourselves and find each other.</p>
<p>Just a typical Smithie! Bright, articulate, and not afraid to speak her mind. Most men are intimidated by that; but those who aren't are secure in their own skin. And..isn't that what we want for our daughters anyway?</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is common knowledge that science and technology have been male-dominated fields. Despite a significant rise in female participation in these areas, current statistics show that women hold only 12 percent of science and engineering jobs in the United States. </p>
<p>In recent years, heated debates over the reasons behind the lack of women in these fields, have determined discrimination to be a primary factor. Professors and activists alike have argued that the science and technology departments of many institutions cater to the education of men in ways that dissuade women from pursuing the fields. Many women have reported feeling discouraged from these subjects - where they are the minority - when they encountered negative stereotypes or were made to feel incompetent.
[/quote]
Interesting article in the Smith Sophian. Also:
[quote]
For the past 70 years, Smith has maintained a spot in the top two percent of four-year colleges with the greatest number of graduates receiving doctorates in science. Along with this apparent strength in educating female pioneers in the fields of science and technology, Smith has also responded to the growing concern of male dominance in these fields.
<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>
<p>Results of research by the Women’s College Coalition elaborate on the positive experience of attending a women’s college.</p>
<p>Students participate more fully in and out of class.
Students report greater satisfaction that their coed counterparts with their college experience in most all measures – academically, developmentally and personally.
Students tend to choose traditionally male disciplines like the sciences.
Students develop higher levels of self-esteem than other achieving women in coed institutions. After two years in coed institutions, women have been shown to have lower levels of self-esteem that when they entered college.
Graduates of women’s colleges are more than twice as likely as graduates of coeducation colleges to receive doctorate degrees and to enter medical school and receive doctorates in the natural sciences.
Have a higher percentage of majors in economics, math and life science today than men at coeducational colleges.
Nearly half the graduates have earned advanced degrees and 81% have continued their education beyond college.
Women’s College students are more likely to graduate.
They are more successful in careers; that is, they tend to hold higher positions, are happier and earn more money.</p>
<p>I am a graduate of a women's college and fully support their advantages. But achievement statistics of outstanding leaders now over age 50 like Hillary Clinton, for example, are misleading because in her (and my) college days, most Ivy League schools were closed to women.</p>
<p>Pyewacket makes a good point, and one I've been considering myself ever since I first saw the stats of alumnae.</p>
<p>Right now the top all-women's colleges are filled by a mix of academic levels. Some students got into Ivies - and turned them down. Some would have gotten into Ivies a few years ago, when admissions weren't quite as competitive, but were rejected when their time came. And others are below both of the above in academic achievement. What I've come to realize, however, is that undergraduate environment has a huge impact of the type of person a student will become. Yes, you need smarts if you want to have an impact on society, but you also need ambition, confidence, creativity, and a host of other qualities. The question is: Do single gender colleges foster these traits? Also, are the students these colleges admit likely to have these personality traits to begin with? </p>
<p>From what I've seen, my answer to both questions above is "yes." I have to wonder, though, whether there was a "lull" at top women's colleges once the Ivies went fully co-ed. Does their success depend on population bubbles that increase selectivity at the Ivies and similar high-ranked institutions? Or are their learning environments such that they will always produce leaders? I don't think anyone can answer that - at least, not yet.</p>
<p>One characteristic of many women who choose women's colleges is that they are willing to put (coed) social life on the back burner in favor of academic pursuits--that must contribute to subsequent academic outcomes. I suspect (unscientifically) that a higher percentage of women's college graduates like to throw themselves intensively into projects with greater concentration and fewer distractions rather than permanently multitasking.</p>
<p>"I am a graduate of a women's college and fully support their advantages. But achievement statistics of outstanding leaders now over age 50 like Hillary Clinton, for example, are misleading because in her (and my) college days, most Ivy League schools were closed to women."</p>
<p>Try senators, congresspeople, ambassadors, or simply college professors under age 50, and you'll find the same thing.</p>
<p>"MWFN, I think we need to sit back a few decades and see how it unfolds."</p>
<p>I agree. I think that the all-women's college alumnae will continue to make notable contributions, but only time will reveal whether this intuition is accurate.</p>
<p>I don't think time is needed at all. Mini is correct, there are many women leaders right now at all ages who attended women's colleges. See post #410 above:
[quote]
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.
[/quote]
A lot is to be said about the type of woman who decides on all-women's colleges, and why they did so. In addition, let's not forget the role models who are inherent in these institutions. Success breeds success. The opportunity to dive headlong into school matters is not all that comes into play; although I would agree that the lack of "distraction" will play itself out in positive ways. Graduates from all-women's colleges are more likely to get advanced degrees, and many, for some reason, are in sciences, math, and engineering.</p>
<p>"Of 61 women members of Congress, 20 percent attended women's colleges."</p>
<p>And last time I looked (granted, before this most recent election), of those under age 50, not a single one attended (undergrad) any of the Ivies, Williams, Swarthmore, Haverford, Amherst, Middlebury, Pomona, Carleton, Colgate....</p>