<p>It is interesting that there aren't more all-male colleges left. One reason might simply be that over the past decade, fewer males have been going on to college than females. Females currently far out number males at ALL colleges in general. The average male-female ratio at Liberal arts schools seems to be hovering at 60-40, in favor of females.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We'd road trip to Dartmouth, Princeton, Trinity, etc. and hotice how the women seemed to be vying for the mens' attention and didn't seem that friendly with each other.......(no flames please, just my experience)
[/quote]
[quote]
I think I've gotten my partying/guy chasing/guy obsession out in high school and I think that having a really focused group of women to learn with during the week and saving the male distractions for the weekends is a good thing.
[/quote]
To be a little superficial (and also realistic): is it possible to have a decent romantic life at a campus where there are only women? I mean... do people from nearby colleges in the case of Wellesley, or I guess Smith, etc. socialize with the women who are part of a single-sex education? I mean everybody says that the other colleges are right next door but how true?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The first thing my mom's friend said (a woman who works with colleges as part of her job) when she heard I was looking at Smith was, "oh but that's a lesbian school!" I think she just meant that it has that reputation, but...yeah.
[/quote]
I've heard that stereotype of women's colleges being associated with lesbians. I mean, there are lesbians everywhere and they're great people. But is it really a higher percentage than at other schools (besides Yale, I guess.)</p>
<hr>
<p>I know this is a pretty superficial posting... but there has to be some way to collect information... after all, these are institutions where one could be living for four years. I guess I think someone has to get past about these topics not being PC and ask the honest question. It matters... please don't tell me I'm being superficial or that I should grow up and get past the social issues. I'm sure other people are wondering as well.</p>
<p>I think it is likely - I HOPE it would be more likely - that all women's colleges would be more gay friendly, and hence attract more lesbian women. If the point is to enfuse education with what it specifically means for women - as women - to function most effectively and to lead - then it should take account of the experience of all women, lesbian, straight, younger, and older. (10% of the Smith student body is made up of older women, average age 36, with a range of 24-69 - something that was of great importance to Jill Ker Conway as she looked back at her mother's experience.) Are there more lesbian women at Smith than gay men and women at Yale? No way to know (my bet is that they are similar.)</p>
<p>Is it harder to meet men at Smith? Duh! I should hope so! (that was, after all, part of the point! This isn't Vassar - 65%/35% - now I think THAT would be uncomfortable!) But there are some men on the campus all the time (through the five-college exchange, and Smith being the center, there is more "in-flow" than "out-flow".) Students do work and play at Amherst and UMass (mine does). There are parties at Smith that attract men from other colleges, and some go elsewhere. Are there as many heterosexual romantic entanglements at Wellesley or Smith than at, say, Williams? Statistically, that would be unlikely.</p>
<p>The social differences are real. You do have to visit. My d. (who had already spent at year at co-ed Evergreen) was much put off by the hetero posturing (and alcohol use) she saw at some of the elite colleges. She couldn't believe sitting in a room full of women at a leading LAC and listening to them all bitch about their weight, and then watch the conversation change as soon as a Y chromosome set foot across the threshold.</p>
<p>Right... that all makes a lot of sense. It's definitely worth a visit.</p>
<p>Mini & Carolyn have made excellent posts. My D is also at Smith and starting with her first party for prospective students a couple of years ago, I've met several dozen Smith students. Somewhere along the line, most of them have a line of dialogue that begins, "I never planned to attend a women's college but...." </p>
<p>At that first party, there were 15-20 current Smith students present to talk the prospects and I was forcibly struck by what great advertising they were for any college: bright, articulate, and even in the way they could disagree with each other about the plusses and minuses of the campus.</p>
<p>Columbia had been my D's #1 on paper. She e-mailed the orchestra director, who replied, "Get admitted to Columbian, come to the audition, then we can talk." Not only did the Smith orchestra director meet with her on the day we were there, he invited her to come to rehearsal that night and sit with her section on stage while they rehearsed. And <em>every</em> interaction with Smith has been like that. (I know that Mini can tell several stories about profs, etc., who put themselves out for he and his D.) Their propaganda says "Four years where it's all about you." And my D has found that to be true so far. She's made friends and is working her butt off, enjoying all her classes. She loves her house (dorm), a Victorian house built in 1879, and her co-residents. She's planning a junior year split between Washington D.C. and Budapest. Guys? Okay...a problem...she doesn't take the time to get to the parties, as much as some but the opportunities are there and there <em>are</em> guys on campus for some of her classes.</p>
<p>My D spent two overnights at Smith and was hooked. She also visited Barnard and applied to Wellesley sight unseen...admitted to all three and took Smith. In the beginning, she was focused on large co-ed schools like Columbia and Georgetown...and she's yet another who "...had no intention of attending a women's college."</p>
<p>Igrok, if you set up a visit, PM me. I'll give you my D's cell number and e-mail. One of the old CC mom's did the same for my D and I'd like to pass the favor on.</p>
<p>I don't have any data to back this up, but in my college search (I now attend smith and love it), many of the co-ed schools offered all-female dorms but not all-male ones. When the reasons for this were questioned in information sessions, the response was almost always "we ask all our students whether they'd rather live in single-sex or co-ed dorms, and we never have enough men for an all-male floor." </p>
<p>So maybe fewer men than women WANT to attend single-sex colleges.</p>
<p>Thank you, TheDad, for the offer. I may just take you up on it soon!</p>
<p>It definitely seems that women get so much more individual attention at one of these instutitons. Are there also advantages after graduation--I believe I read something about there being strong alumni networks at women's institutions... easier to get jobs after graduation?</p>
<p>Yes, the alumnae networks are fantastic. It's even helpful before graduation for getting good internships.</p>
<p>The Wellesley and Smith networks seem ferociously active. Those are the two I've had contact with locally. The local Smith coordinator was recently names Alumna of the Year, so I may have a skewed sense. But, speaking of internships, Smith guarantees every student one paid internship during the four years. It's at least a step in evening out the opportunities available affluent and not-affluent students though I think affluent students often use the money to stretch their internships over a longer period of time.</p>
<p>Most schools have internship grants freely available.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>"we ask all our students whether they'd rather live in single-sex or co-ed dorms, and we never have enough men for an all-male floor." So maybe fewer men than women WANT to attend single-sex colleges.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Stacy - </p>
<p>It may well be true that fewer men want to attend all-male colleges, but I wouldn't take the dorm anecdote as evidence for that. Asking all high school boys whether they want to attend an all-male school and asking college freshmen who have already chosen a co-ed school whether they want to live in an all-male dorm are two rather different questions. In the second case you are asking a group of men who have already made a choice to surround themselves with women.</p>
<p>I am in the middle of Jill Ker Conway's slim book--"A Woman's Education" -it is a very lovely piece of work.</p>
<p>I am interested in discussing Smith v. Wellesley. DD is nearly dropping Smith so that she does not have 2 women's colleges if she needs to drop some colleges. She has not investigated the differences much yet. The two schools sound very different to me. The more I hear about Smith the more I like it. My impression is that Wellesley is much more selective and has the edge academically, though. We are hoping to squeeze an east coast visit in, but it likely won't happen until after acceptances.</p>
<p>Wellesley is more selective until you factor out two things: 10% of Smith's student body is made up of older women (average age 36; range 24-69), many of whom are actively recruited. Secondly, 25% of Smith's student body is made up of Pell Grant recipients (low-income students from the bottom 35% of the U.S. population economically speaking.) This makes Smith significantly more diverse (many fewer private school students as well), but "less selective" in terms of SAT scores, etc. </p>
<p>The schools have different strengths, and some similarities. (I have no idea where your impression comes from, but you are certainly entitled to it.) But I think you'll find a different "feel" at each, which will amount to more than their academic differences. Some of it has to do with location. Wellesley is wonderfully located near Boston, a great city for students. But it is very suburban, and there is no town to speak of. Basically, students have told me they have to leave the college for "excitement". Smith is located in a happening town, and feels larger because of the 5-colleges, but is certainly no Boston. </p>
<p>Best thing to do is to visit (I don't think you could do wrong with either.)</p>
<p>Thanks for your response. Esp on the location. DD is an urbanite and would like to have city access. However, she does not like suburbs too much(she goes to school in Claremont, CA) and has chosen rural schools too, even though she has no experience. In fact, she chose them so that she can have a new experience.</p>
<p>One impression on selectivity comes from the very informed GC, who classified Wellesley as 'long shot' and Smith as 'match' (not even reach/match, which is a catagory he has). But my impression is just that--far short of even reaching the 'opinion' level, so no entitlement is involved and I'm ready to be disabused of the notion.</p>
<p>A visit would be a financial hardship and nearly impossible. If it happens at all, it will happen with an aunt and be after acceptance.</p>
<p>Diversity is a consideration for us.</p>
<p>On the subject of all male or female colleges. I'm wondering if the research that has been done renectly on high schools still holds true for college? Basically, that females perform better in all female environments and males perform better in a mixed-sex environment. Also there is sex specific optimal learning methods. Anyone following this kind of gender research?</p>
<p>D considered both Smith and Wellesley last year and ended up applying to Wellesley, but in the end she chose to attend a co-ed school.</p>
<p>We visited both and both seemed like excellent schools. The town of Wellesley didn't seem exactly suburban to me - more like a middle to upper-middle class small town with a terrific big city nearby. Northampton is larger than Wellesley and kind of "funkier" - sort of a mini-Berkeley feel to parts of it. There were some homeless people, derelicts, and aging ex-hippies roaming the streets of Northampton. I guess you could say that Northampton is more colorful than Wellesley.</p>
<p>The Wellesley campus was the most beautiful of any campus we ever visited (not that Smith was ugly; it and every other school just weren't quite as gorgeous as Wellesley).</p>
<p>Wellesley is not part of a formal consortium as Smith is, but students can cross-register and attend classes at MIT. However, I question how much this actually happens, since MIT must be at least a 30 to 40 minute bus ride away. There are also social exchanges with MIT - parties and such, and I know that those do in fact happen regularly.</p>
<p>I asked D why she chose to apply to Wellesley and not Smith (or Mt. Holyoke which we also visited). She mentioned the beautiful campus, and she also said that the other women's schools spent most of their tour and admissions spiel time telling her why she should attend a women's college. But Wellesley exhibited a little more institutional self-confidence and spent their time telling her why she should attend Wellesley. She liked that.</p>
<p>Mine chose Smith (over Williams and a bunch of other places), but it had more to do with the match of interests they had for her. The music department is far more robust at Smith, and when one adds in the 5 colleges, there really is no comparison. She is the paid research assistant to the 5-College Opera Consortium, and is working on a publication edition of the first opera ever written by a woman. She also liked Smith's JYA options, especially for Italy (the oldest and best established in the nation.) And a Quaker meeting half a block away (a big deal for her), and a real town. The 5-college thing is real, at least for my d., as she sings with an "ancient voices" group that meets at Mt Holyoke (and her supervising professor is a 5-College Prof. based there).</p>
<p>Smith of course has its own engineering school (and has just raised $450 million to support it.) Traditionally, and for reasons that probably have to do with institutional history, Smith has been very strong in biology; Mt. Holyoke stronger in chemistry. I think Smith also differs from Wellesley in that it has a totally open curriculum (for my d. not an issue, as she is interested in EVERYTHING.)</p>
<p>Smith's campus has more of an urban feel. The front campus abuts the town. The back campus is quiet and bucolic. (Somewhat to my surprise, my d. asked for housing on the front side.) If you want really bucolic (and very beautiful), I think Mt. Holyoke beats 'em both. The town of Wellesley will definitely remind her of Claremont (a town I like!), but feels even smaller and is more upscale. (Having visited, Wellesley may remind her of Scripps, though it is much larger and more spread out of course, and it is New England, not So.Cal!)</p>
<p>But let's be clear - the similarities are much greater than the differences. And you can get a great education at any one of them.</p>
<p>Women's colleges are interesting to me largely for one reason-females in positions of power. One stat I always look at is % of female faculty. Sometimes at even the most liberal and forward thinking of schools , the ratio is abysmal. It makes me favor some women's colleges and my wife almost insist upon them.(She is a Barnard and Smith fan.)</p>
<p>D of course has eschewed dating in high school as being ridiculous-"dad, where do they go? I just don't see the point" but it appears that she feels access to males is more important at the college level. Now that is bothersome, to say the least. Frightening actually, and I will continue to suggest that it might be wise to date some before she gets 1000 miles from home. Just a thought.</p>
<p>So, here are some interesting choices we have stumbled on - Hobart and William Smith and The College of Saint Benedict/Saint John's University. Hobart and St. John's are all male schools joined by paths, carts,zip-lines or trolleys to all female schools Wm. Smith and St. Ben's . They can share facilities , and classrooms but at the end of the day , most students are back in the single sex environment. Is this have your cake and eat it too? Or simply the worst of both world's? What do you think? (Oh and Wm. Smith has a scholarship with requirements that read like my D's life history. All the better.)</p>
<p>I know this is board aimed at how people think about womens colleges, but I think it applies to all single-sex colleges. Personally, I'm applying to Morehouse which is an all-male college of about 3000 students and I'm fine with it, I mean yeah at first it seemed wierd, but think about it single-sex student bodies promote a greater sense of sisterhood and bortherhood then their coed counterparts, people at these schools thrive because like many of the other people who have posted on this board, they have great resources and the drama involved with the other sex is somewhat, if not all diminished due to the single-sex atmosphere. But in the end, some people just do not like this type of environment and some people do</p>
<p>To build on something Mini said, one of the reasons that D chose Smith over Wellesley was that both music (orchestra) and dance (ballet) were more accepted as part of the central program, as opposed to an afterthought. I have trouble finding exactly the right words but as an approximation, she also felt that Wellesley's alumnae were annoyingly careerist in outlook whereas Smith's were more holistic.</p>
<p>Then there's the Smith vs. Wellesley joke: </p>
<p>A professor at each school walks in at 9am and says "Good morning, class."</p>
<p>At Smith one student says "What do you mean by good? How do you know my values align with yours?" A second says "Usage of 'morning' is Western hemisphere-centric." A third says, "Why 'class'? We should eliminate classist language!"</p>
<p>At Wellesley, 20 students scribble, "Good morning, class" in their notebooks.</p>