Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    I have given this subject a significant amount of thought since I
    graduated from a single-sex institution. Based on MY experience, there
    is some truth to that generalizations in the base topic. In fact the
    college I attended promotes these ideas in the admissions propoganda. 

    In my opinion a single sex environment provided role models and
    opportunities for women that may not exist in a coeducational
    environment. At a single sex school, women see other women involved in
    student government, publications, athletics, protests etc. I feel this
    exerts a powerful influence on a woman in the way she perceives herself
    and her capabilities. Yes she can do X if she wants to. And she can do
    X, because the opportunity exists. Even if a women does not take
    advantage of these opportunities, the influence remains beyond her
    college years. 

    But in the end these are just generalizations. Some women are not
    intimidated in a coed environment and have the talent and background to
    compete for opportunities with men. For others, like myself, who lacked
    the confidence, a single sex environment provides them with the chance
    to gain confidence in themselves and their abilities. I also came to
    value and appreciate the abilities of other women. 

    In the end, it is the individual's choice and she should weigh all
    facets of the institution when making a decision. 
       
    

        It was long since decided that segregation on the basis of
        race makes no sense... even from the point of view of
        protecting the disadvantaged from being overshadowed by the
        advantaged so they can "gain confidence".  It almost never
        worked that way, anyway.  I really don't see any reason to
        believe that segregation on the basis of sex works any better.
        It seems likely that the women who aren't exposed to competition
        with men (or anyone else) are going to build a false sense
        of security... you can call it "confidence" if you want,
        but it's a bubble likely to burst quickly when they come
        out of the protected environment.
        
        Things aren't fair, and that's tough.  But you'll never make
        things fair by hiding from them.
        
        	/dave

    My oldest (eldest?) daughter just went thru the pomp and circum-
    stantial ceremony of graduating from the 8'th to the 9'th grade.
    Each homeroom had a male and female representative. The male had
    the dubious distiction of announcing the names of each graduate
    and the female had the honor of handing each graduate her/his
    diploma.
    
    I'm glad our school systems are so cooperative in the battle
    for true equal rights.
    
    

    As a graduate of the oldest women's college in the country I would
    like to speak out in their favor. I just went to my 20th reunion
    at Mount Holyoke and it left me with very positive feelings about
    the school and my experiences there.
    
    Do you know that a higher percentage of women who graduated from
    single sex colleges go on to obtain graduate degrees, M.D.'s and
    management positions than women from coed colleges. (This was reported
    by a speaker at my reunion - and no I don't have the source.) This
    was the case with recent graduates as well as women of my era and
    certainly speaks well for a single sex education being to a woman's
    advantage when she gets out in the "real world". Other studies have
    shown that graduates of women's schools are more apt to participate,
    and speak out in class in graduate school than women who went to
    coed schools. I certainly found this to be true when I went for
    my M.A. You might also be interested to know that enrollment in
    all or nearly allBlack schools has been on the rise lately. (Source
    - the recent Boston Globe series on Black education .) One reason
    given by Black students for their preference was the same as I have
    heard from women at women's colleges - a freedom from certain 
    steriotypes/prejudices allowing them to get on with the business
    of getting a good education. (Only fighting one battle at a time
    so to speak.) (Other reasons for the increase in enrollment in Black
    schools was greater financial aid and greater assistance for smart
    students with poor academic backgrounds.)
    
    I remember once as an undergraduate visiting a youngman who was
    a graduate student at M.I.T. He told me that he rountinely gave
    women a lower grade for similar work because a woman had to be better
    than a man to do as well at M.I.T. (his opinion not college policy.)
    One advantage of a woman's college then, was that you would be graded
    on your abilities without encountering this type of sexist bias
    from instructors and professors (much of it subtle and hidden.)
    Can we honestly say that this sort of bias is no longer found today?
    
    Another advantage was that of strong role models. Twenty years ago
    there were very few women professors at coed schools (and almost
    none at men's schools.) This hasn't improved very much today, but
    women's colleges still employ a lot of bright competent women. I
    remember being very impressed with my professors - some of the first
    bright high achieving women I had ever met. Having women of this
    type to emulate would still be valuable for young women today.
    
    Over the years since I graduated I found I could very often pick
    out the women in a group who had been to a woman's college. Very
    often they were the ones who seemed most sure of themselves, and
    showed no hesitation in speaking out in any situation. I believe
    that women's colleges do impart a greater degree of self-confidence
    and drive to achieve in women than do co-ed schools and that this
    definitely does carry over to life after school.
    
    Probably the major drawback was a lack of natural ways to meet men
    as friends - putting too much emphasis on the socializing on weekends
    (mixers and their ilk) and setting men up as creatures apart as
    a result. (For those of you fortunate enough to have never gone
    to a mixer - often refered to as "cattle shows" - they are something
    like a dating bar where students from one school are bused to a
    dance at another - a terrible way to get to meet people.) However,
    the reverse side of this was an advantage - the absence of men meant
    that the campus was quieter during the week and students could
    generally study in their rooms. I know of a number of people who
    attended men's or coed schools who could never study in their dorm
    room because of the noise. (Question are men students still noisier
    than women?)
    
    I am certainly very well pleased with the quality of the education
    I received and feel that there have been lasting benefits to me
    to this day. I would encourage any bright ambitious young woman to
    attend MHC or any of the other remaining woman's colleges. Unfortun-
    ately MHC may well be forced to go coed due to financial pressures.
    The pool of qualified young women who are interested in a single
    sex college has been declining. Given the intense loyalty I've seen
    among MHC alumnae (which I don't see in women graduates of coed
    schools) I hope the college will not be the looser in the long run
    if they do.
    
    Bonnie        
    

And I thought I wouldn't have anything to say in this conference...

In high school, I never once considered a single sex college.  Besides the
fact that the prominent engineering institutions are all coed, it just seemed
unnatural to me.  I had never been in a single-sex situation in my life
(except for gym and home ec; yuck!).  So I went to MIT.

Looking back, I should have recognized much earlier the benefits of a female
environment.  Soph and Junior year I roomed in a single-sex suite.  Sr year,
when I moved back to a coed suite (for a better room!), I missed having
someone supportive around at the end of the day (honey, I'm home!).  Even
though there were often males around, being an all-female suite encouraged
a kind of closeness among us (family).

Junior year I also took a course at Wellesley.  I wanted a good art course,
and had some friends that highly recommended Wellesley's Art 102.  Something
about the teaching style made the stuff eminently learnable for me.  It
couldn't be the gender of the profs; it varied.  It couldn't be the contents;
I took intro to Music at MIT, with as much prior knowledge, and less success.
And I didn't feel particularly close to my classmates.  But the talks were
exhilarating, and I learned.

After I graduated, the female CS grad students put out "the blue book".
It was a pamphlet on the sexism they experienced from peers and profs in
the CS department.  They pointed out examples; I recognized some.  I began
wondering.  And I discovered: yes, the jokes about only being admitted to
MIT because I was a woman DID hurt me!  I just never noticed.  I KNEW that
wasn't true (intellectually).

A very close friend went to an all-female grammar school (Philippine). 
I'm not sure its the college that needs to be single sex.  But time to find
your feet as a woman/person seems to make you stronger, long term.

	Mez
    

	    I guess mileage varies.  I was on a co�d floor my freshman*
	year, and we were considered by many to be the closest floor the
	school (WPI) had seen in years.  The floor was evenly divided,
	with all the men on one side and all the women on the other.  As
	time went on, of course, the sexes were more evenly distributed
	throughout the floor (especially at study-time and bedtime).
	    In contrast, a nearby all-woman floor was always involved in
	civil wars.  I suppose there were pockets of supportive friends
	in there somewhere, but that went on on my floor too.
	    I've never lived in an all-male situation, so I can't offer
	any insights into that . . .
			<_Jym_>

    I did my undergraduate work at a large university, which of course
    was coed.  I solved my social life vs. studying issues by getting
    married at age 19.  That left me much freer to pursue academics
    than my peers who had to put an inordinate amount of time into
    organizing their social lives!  Looking back, this really was the
    best way for me to focus on academics.  At the same time I'm glad
    I didn't feel like I had to stay with someone I was drawn to at
    age 19 (the marriage barely outlasted graduation...).
    
    I got my first master's degree at Smith.  I loved the atmosphere
    of the classes.  I was not just "free" to speak out and take a position
    on any topic under discussion; it felt required to me.  At Smith
    I learned to support statements I made, because the other women 
    in the class and the professors would challenge me if I made
    vague or emotionally based statements.  (At the university I had
    found that I could often say outrageous things and get away with a good
    deal of "bullshitting"--people usually just nodded.) I also appreciated
    the level at which my papers were read and critiqued at Smith. 
    I was continually aware of the high quality of attention being directed
    toward me.
    
    I recently began work on an MBA at a school in the Boston area.  I 
    feel so much pressure to hold back and to refrain from overwhelming 
    other people.  If I state something strongly I can usually feel people 
    drawing back from me and refusing to argue.  I feel a good deal
    of pressure not to be "rude" to male professors by disagreeing with
    them.  (At Smith we were encouraged to disagree with male or
    female professors--if we could support the point we were
    making!)  
    
    My experience is one of continually trying to decide whether to 
    "hold back" or not.  I never had to think about that in a single-sex
    school.  A friend teased me recently about being "elitist", and the
    comment hurt.  With so many women experiencing their own power and
    ability to be articulate, why should we have to go to a single sex
    school to be able to do that?  I had hoped that my experience at
    Smith would be mirrored in graduate school in general--I had hoped
    to find bright and capable PEOPLE willing to engage in honest and
    rigorous discussion.  And I still hope I can find (or help create)
    more opportunities where that is true in the years to come.
    

I went to a technical college where most of the students were men.  My
friends were mostly men, and I was very happy to have that opportunity.  In
high school, I had very few female friends, and no male friends except for
my boyfriend.  I was very shy then, especially among boys, but college more
than made up for this lack.  I learned that men are people, too.  I might have
still had a "fear of men" when I started working if I hadn't been in a co-ed
environment (or a predominantly male environment even) during college.  Weekend
parties and mixer-type dances aren't really my thing either, so I might never
have met any men while in a women's college; meeting them as students in the
same boat I was in (and the same classes!) worked wonders for me!

I also doubt I would have had equivalent educational opportunities at a
non-technical college, and I don't know how many women's technical colleges
there are.

Or, maybe we can condense all this down to the fact that I loved my college
years and friends, and wouldn't want things to have been any different. :-)

Jill

    [I had started this as a new note but was later pointed here.  I
    first include my original note and then some new text. - Steve]

    An article in the March 30 "Newsweek" begins as follows:
    
       Students at Wheaton College hold campus traditions dear, from
       singing on the library steps during senior year to floating
       candle boats on Peacock Pond.  Now, in its 153rd year, a new
       ritual has entered Wheaton lore: "Black Thursday," named for
       the day two months ago when the board of trustees announced
       plans to admit men in the fall of 1988.  Distraught undergrads
       at the Norton, Mass., campus have donned black armbands and
       draped black banners from their dorm windows every Thursday
       in protest.  One devotee of single-sex education even sneaked
       into the dining hall and tied black thread around every piece
       of silverware.
    
    The reason given for going coed is to increase admissions - the
    number of single-sex schools is shrinking rapidly.  There is a
    notion that many prospective applicants think that attending
    such schools means a limited social life.
    
    I think this is an interesting topic for discussion.  I attended
    a single-sex high school but a very coed college, so I don't think
    I have a good feel for the issues here.  I'm sure we must have
    some alumna of single-sex colleges among the readership, or perhaps
    those who can comment on why one would or would not want to go
    to such a school.  Is there any real advantage in the educational
    sense to such an arrangement?
    					Steve

    
    [New text follows]
    
    There is some good discussion of single-sex education in this note
    already, but perhaps some new noters have additional observations.

    [Here are the comments that were entered in the other note...]
================================================================================
Note 252.1              Fading of the single-sex colleges                 1 of 3
STUBBI::B_REINKE "the fire and the rose are one"     92 lines  26-MAR-1987 23:11
                         -< On one single sex school >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Hi Steve - I entered this quite a while ago - it was probably
    one of my earliest contributions to this conference. I was interested
    to note that the Newsweek article confirmed the graduate school
    statistics that I mentioned last summer.
    
    [Note 36.4 was inserted here]
    
================================================================================
Note 252.2              Fading of the single-sex colleges                 2 of 3
RANGLY::SPECTOR_DAVI                                 14 lines  27-MAR-1987 07:32
                          -< can they deny accesss ? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



re: -0


	I was under the impression that it was illegal to deny anyone 
	admission to a college on the basis of their gender.

	Wasn't that the case a number of years ago when women broke 
	down the barriers at all male schools ?

	.....or is this a one way street ?

David

    The womens colleges are not required to admit men because they
    are private schools.
    
    The rationale for remaining single sex schools is that they offer
    a type of education to women that is simply not available anywhere
    else.
    
    Bonnie
    
    p.s. Women did not storm the gates of the men's schools. The men's
    schools decided to go coed largely for economic reasons.

    Actually, one of the things tossed around in the battle against
    the ERA was that single-sex schools would now become illegal.
    
    While I would really appreciate the opportunity to have the advantages
    Bonnie talks about (many of my friends were from all women's schools),
    I would rather have the ERA passed...
    
    Lee

The ERA only says that sex may not be the basis of discriminations in LAWS.
Single-sex schools are not that way because of a law, but just because the 
people who set up the school choose to make them that way.

re: .11

    
    >The rationale for remaining single sex schools is that they offer
    >a type of education to women that is simply not available anywhere
    >else.
    
    >Bonnie
    
    
    Bonnie,
	
	Would you be as comfortable if the senario was reversed ?

	For instance :  An all male school (reknown for graduating some
	of the top scientific minds in the country ) doggedly fights to
	keep itself a single sex school and gives the following rationale:

			a. They are a private institution and therefore can
			   do what they want.

			b. The type of education they can give their students
			   (because of it's single gender status) is simply
			    not available anywhere else.

David
		           
		

    Comfortable is a rather odd word to use....
    
    The all womens schools were founded *because* situation you
    describe existed. 
    
    Wether or not this is an adequate rationale for the schools
    continuing to exist may be a subject of debate - but as long
    as some women continue to feel they value the kind of education
    offered by these schools I hope that they will have the
    opportunity to have the choice.
    
    Bonnie

    I wish I had gone to one of these schools.  I would have a problem
    with a school that excluded women or blacks, but do not have a 
    problem with schools that are only *for* women or blacks (or black 
    women :-)  ).  I think that what these schools have to offer is
    role models, and the subconscious feeling that you can make it, too,
    that you are not to be held back, even subconsciously, because of
    sex or other "differences" from the white businessman.    

                           Carol