Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    Didn't this happen to Wheaton recently also?  Like within the past few
    years?  Anyone know the outcome of that?
    
    -Jody
    

    I find this whole situation very interesting.  I attended an all female
    college, Simmons.  During the time I was there this question came up
    for debate also.  The enrollment was shrinking since the administration
    said that they were not going to sacrifice the quality of the students
    for money.  So the question of allowing men was put to a vote of the
    students.  The actual vote was to allow men to attend Simmons to keep
    the price down, or to remain all women but to raise the cost of
    tuition.  The response was overwhelming to keep it all female, and we 
    all knew that the tuition would be raised somewhat to alleviate the low
    enrollment. (Also Simmons has to pay a fee for descriminating against
    males which also would have gone away if the vote had been to allow
    males)
    It seems simple to the college here to ask for a vote.  Allowing the
    students to decide, as we did. It appears that they werent even asked
    if they would pay more to keep it all female!!!
    
    Judy
    

    Colby-Sawyer (in Maine) went from all-women to co-ed last year.
    
    Pam
    

    
    re .2
    
    What was the penalty for discrimination against males?  Why was
    it imposed and by what government agency?  Is it legal for an
    institution of higher learning to discriminate on the basis of
    sex?  Does this only apply to private colleges?  I do not understand
    how an institution can claim to advocate the removal of one kind
    of discrimination ( against women ) and advocate discrimination
    against another group ( men ).
    
    Is this institution discriminitory?
    
    If it is discriminitory what makes dicrimination right in this case
    and wrong in other cases?
    
    I am disturbed by the idea of an institution which discriminates
    against any group not just this one.  I am curious what people
    think about this issue.
    

    
    
    I believe that single-sex schools are exempt from some kinds of
    government funding (grants?), so it amounts to a "penalty" for
    being a single-sex school, but I don't think that there is any kind
    of fine that is levied by a govt. agency.
    
    Justine
    
    ps  Wheaton College has gone co-ed as of a couple of years ago.

    Nit, but Colby Saywer is in New London, NH.
    
    It's a very small school and I could see how a drop in enrollment could
    turn into a crisis.
    
    Lisa

    According to the NPR report yesterday evening, the students have been
    on strike for 4 days because they were not asked to vote about
    admitting men.  From the students who were interviewed, it seemed like
    most were against the idea - better dead than co-ed was one of the
    slogans used.  Some spoke very passionately about keeping Mills a
    women's college.
    
    In the late 60's when I attended Smith, they also considered admitting
    men to the college.  Back then we thought it was a great idea - but we
    were only thinking of our social lives at that time!  Looking back on
    all I learned, the friendships I made, and how I was encouraged in
    areas in which women were involved as a small minority (math and
    computers), I'm glad that Smith stayed a women's college.
    
    Has anyone attended a college which was once a women's college and now
    admits men?  Are there many men on campus?  Has it changed the way the
    students are taught?  Just wondering.
    
    						Jan

>    Has anyone attended a college which was once a women's college and now
>    admits men?  Are there many men on campus?  Has it changed the way the
>    students are taught?  Just wondering.

    I attended a Jr High that was all girls before my class. Does that
    count? The discrimination against the boys was amazing. Talk about
    your second class citizenship.

    			Alfred

    And just think.  Only a few short months ago women were campaigning
    to force the all male VMI to go coed.
    
    My how times change.
    
    fred();

    fred,
    
    but were the same women campaining for VMI to go coed as are
    objecting to having all women's colleges go coed?
    
    I also went to an all women's college, Mt Holyoke. I noticed this
    year when my son was reading Baron's guide to colleges that
    Mt Holyoke had gone from being most competetive (ranked 1) to
    competetive (ranked 3) or from being relatively as hard to get
    into as Harvard and Yale to the competetive level of the University
    of Massachusetts. I can only assume that this was done to widen
    the pool of female applicants, but I was saddened to see this
    change.
    
    I'm very proud of my college and feel that a single sex education
    does have definite value.
    
    Bonnie
    
    p.s. and thank you Mark for catching my spelling error :-)

    re .10
    
    Are you saying that sexual discrimination is ok so long as it
    *benefits* women??
    
    fred();

    
>    but were the same women campaining for VMI to go coed as are
>    objecting to having all women's colleges go coed?

	I have no idea about those "other" women but how do you feel?
	Does VMI have as much right to stay all male as Mills/etc do
	to stay all female? How do other women in this conference feel?

				Alfred

What is VMI?

D!

    Sure - single sex schools have the right to stay however they can
    afford, and however their alumni, faculty, staff, and HOPEFULLY
    students vote - PROVIDING there is an equivalent quality school in
    existence with similar programs that is co-educational.  
    
    I feel equal opportunity in education must be maintained, and
    everything else is gravy.
    
    I think a cool thing is when two private schools decide to have a
    transfer/consortium program where they are still kind of single-sex
    (i.e. the students live at their primarily single-sex school), and can
    cross-register for courses at the other school which may not be offered
    at their primary school).
    
    
    -Jody
    

    I'm with Jody. I believe that private single sex schools have every
    right to exist. I believe that private schools for particular religious
    groups or for Blacks also have the right to exist.
    
    I think things are better if there is an opportunity for students
    at the schools to take classes at other schools, but I think that
    there are advantages for some Blacks or Women or Men or Seventh Day
    Adventists in attending schools that are predominantly for
    their own race, gender or religion.
    
    I would say this is *providing* this is not the only school in the
    area so that others are prohibited from getting an education (unlikely)
    and that this is not a state college. My personal feeling is
    that state supported schools should be coed.
    
    It has been shown many times that Black graduates from all or nearly
    all Black colleges, and women graduates from women's colleges do
    better in graduate school and in the business world.
    
    Bonnie

    
    VMI is sort of a private old style West Point.
    
    General Marshall went there... 
    
    They offer courses in Comparative Strategies, Tactics of 
    Hannibal in the Punic Wars, Marching 101, and the
    Manual (er, Personual) of Arms, among others..

	RE: .15 Any idea if men from all male schools or whites from all
	white schools do better then those who go to mixed schools?

			Alfred

    Alfred,
    
    I have no idea. However I think that the principle may differ a little.
    
    The advantage to women of going to all women's colleges is that they
    become more intellectually agressive, they speak out more in class,
    they hold more school offices etc etc. The same is true of Blacks
    in all Black colleges. 
    
    In general, white men speak out more in class and are elected to
    more class offices in mixed schools.
    
    Bonnie

	Bonnie,

	I can tell you were never among the first males in a previously
	all female school. :-) I was. I believe that the principles are
	similar at least vis a vi co-ed schools. My experiance indicates
	that males in an all male school feel freer to work hard at
	accademics then they do in co-ed schools. The peer presures are
	different.

			Alfred

    Alfred
    
    In re males at all male schools, I agree with you, in re working
    harder and different peer pressure.
    
    :-)
    
    Bonnie

    re: .13 (D!)
    
    � What is VMI?
    
    It's an acronym, of course.
    
    
    . . .for Virginia Military Institute.  Or, as we at the University
    of Virginia called them "Virginia's Marching Idiots".�  It puzzles
    why young women would want to go there.  But that's not too surprising 
    given that I'm equally puzzled why young men would want to go there.
    
    Steve
    
    � Before anyone takes offense to that, let me be the first to admit 
    that I found that the similarity between one of UVa's nicknames (The 
    Wahoos) and the Yahoos of Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" was 
    a resemblance in much more than just the name.
    

    By the way, apparently VMI is a state supported school.
    
    bj

    As I understand it, the decision for Mills to go coed was primarily
    economics.  They are about to go broke.  I wonder if those same
    demonstrators that don't want Mills to go coed would support a,
    say, 50% increase in touition/fees to keep the school as it is?
    Also if there is that big an increase in touition/fees, would
    the school be able to attract enough new enrolees to stay afloat?
    
    fred();

I attended an all-women's college- Rivier College
in Nashua.  Rivier addressed the same issue my
senior year there- 1987.  I was one of the students
on the committee to attend discussions as to 
whether or not it should go co-ed.  The administration
decided not to go co-ed, ironically- because of
economics and marketing.   With many of the other
women's colleges (the closest being Colby-Sawyer
in New London) going co-ed- they felt they could
market Rivier as one of the few remaining women's
colleges in the Northeast.

By the way- Men do attend Rivier- but they are not
part of the USW- undergraduate school of women.  They
are classified under the Continuing Education program
(both evening and day classes).  They just can't carry a 
full load of classes.  And there are no restrictions 
in the Master's programs.  So in a way- Rivier is playing 
both ends against the middle- stating that they are a women's 
college, but not really being one.

Terri

    re .24  Fred
    
    I think one of the points of the demonstration was that the students
    were not asked their opinion (re increased tuition vs. going coed).
    
    So nobody -- including the school's administration -- really knows
    whether the protesting students would be prepared to put their money
    where their mouth is.  
    
    I think it would have been a good idea to ask the students, don't you?
    
    Pam
    
    P.S.  It's also possible nobody asked the alumnae whether they would
    launch a massive funding drive to prevent being forced to go coed for
    money reasons.

    Pam,
    I'm with you, if MHC comes to that point I hope they do canvass
    the students and the alums first..
    
    bytheway
    
    do you know anything about the droping of admissions standards
    that I noticed?
    
    is this common for the remaining women's colleges for survival?
    
    bj

    Hi Bonnie,
    
    Actually, my jaw dropped when I read your note...when I went, we were
    listed up at the top in Barron's.  I knew we had dropped standards, but
    not that far that quickly.  I think Elizabeth Kennan has always been
    concerned about maintaining lots of money -- maybe she's trying to make
    sure MHC never gets to the financial point where we have no
    choice...but I think dropping standards is sort of a counter-productive
    way to do it.
    
    Yes, I would appreciate being asked, too ...
    
    Pam

    Pam
    
    I was shocked when my son thrust that Barrons evaluation under my
    nose..
    sounds like we should take this to mail, esp to our mutual alma
    matter..
    sorry folks
    
    MHTs are rather rabid about our school
    
    bj

    The last I heard the Mills Board (or Trustees or whatever) had met with
    an alumni group. Yes indeed one of, if not the, main reasons for going
    coed is financial. The issue is far from settled, the college is very
    willing to try to stay single sex, but needs some solutions to the
    financial problems. In particular, in going to foundations for funding,
    one for the questions foundations ask is "what is the amount of support
    from alumni", Mills has about a 30% contribution rate, lower than
    average. The alums were told that they needed to get the rate up to 50%
    and to get alumni contributions into the $750,000 to $1,000,000 range,
    and for this to be a commitment from the alumni association, not a
    small group of alums, for the college to be able to raise enough
    foundation money, and to stay financially viable.
    
    We'll see.
    
    	-- Charles
    
    P.S. I have no particular interest in Mills as an institution, I went
    to Cal, but I hear about these things since here in the Bay Area it's
    local news, and was getting a lot of coverage.

    re .16, Bob-
    
    >     VMI is sort of a private old style West Point.
                           ^^^^^^^
    Um, that's "public", Bob.  As in "state-supported".  I looked it up.
    
    Not like Mills, which really is private.
    
    DougO

    
    
    When I was at Smith (about 10 years ago), one of the deans told me that
    the caliber of students at women's colleges had suffered since the
    Ivy League went co-ed.  Smith, Wellesly, and Mount Holyoke used to
    attract the best women students in the country, but many of them are
    now going to Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.
    
    I also imagine that since women in this country make less than men, (on
    average), it must be hard for women's colleges to raise money.
    
    Justine

>    I also imagine that since women in this country make less than men, (on
>    average), it must be hard for women's colleges to raise money.
 
I know women in general make less money than men in general, and I imagined
that a big part of this was that women get less education than men.  Is it
true that women who graduate from big-name women's colleges make less than
the average graduate from a big-name co-ed college?  If so, then *that* is
truly scary.  If I had to guess, I would say it seemed likely that women
graduating from Wellesley make just as much money as people graduating from
Harvard.

On a different note, what exactly is the nature of Radcliff?  I never have
understood their relationship to Harvard.  Is it (or was it?) and all-women's
sub-college of Harvard U?  

D!

    D!
    
    Sorry but it is indeed true that even women graduates from name
    colleges make less on the average than their male counterparts.
    
    Bonnie

    Bonnie and Pam,

    Barron's competitiveness ratings are based on the ratio of those
    accepted to the total number of applicants.  They are not a
    measurement of a college's admission standards or the quality of
    education it offers, although there is often a correlation.
 
    In these days of rising college costs and tightening financial aid
    at many schools, a smaller applicant pool could say more about a 
    college's affordability than it's standards.  I'd hate to think 
    that a college's motivation for going coed would be, essentially, 
    a shrinking pool of _rich_ applicants.  And yet, I think that's
    often exactly the case.

    I remember hearing sometime last fall that Bryn Mawr (another 
    seven sister college) was having less of a problem in recent
    years getting qualified applicants, and that a much higher
    percentage of those accepted were actually choosing to attend.
    In general, the trend seemed to be for students to apply to
    fewer schools than they had in the past.  It was also stated that
    more of those acceptees than in the past said they chose Bryn Mawr 
    _because_ it was a women's college than "in spite of".  I also 
    seem to remember reading that these numbers fluctuated greatly 
    from year to year, making predictions harder than either they had 
    been in the past or than they currently are at coed schools.

    It's also significant to remember that there are fewer applicants
    out there than there were 10 years ago, and that that could be
    affecting the competitiveness ratings as well.

    In general (this from admissions staff at women's colleges, circa
    1982) Harvard and Yale have always (since they've been coed, at least)
    had lower applicant : admitted ratios than the seven sister colleges,	
    but this hasn't always been apparent in Barron's rating system, 
    although seven sister colleges have frequently been ranked in the 
    "Highly Competitive" category rather than "Most Competitive".  This
    is the first I've heard of one being ranked less competitive than
    that, though.

    I have a sister at Mount Holyoke now.  From what she tells me about
    trying to move to another dorm room, it doesn't sound like enrollment
    is down, anyway.

	Sharon

    re .33 -
    
    Radcliffe started in the late 19th century as "The Annex." Professors
    would teach their classes at Harvard and then trek a mile or so to give
    the same lectures to women. I'm not sure when they stopped this and
    started letting Radcliffe students attend Harvard classes. I think it
    was around World War II, when there were so few men students and
    professors around, they figured out it was easier to lecture once. Radcliffe
    students received degrees from Radcliffe up till 1963, when all degrees
    were granted by Harvard. Women who go to Harvard now, as I understand
    it, don't really have any reason to be aware of a Radcliffe, except
    historically. But it still maintains a separate administration and
    separate ties with its alumnae. And students of feminist persuasion
    tend to seek out whatever Radcliffe-based organizations there are. 
    Radcliffe has had women presidents since about the early 60s; before 
    then they were men.
    

re. 36

I thought that women were still being made to apply to Radcliffe until the 
mid 80's but I guess I'm wrong.  I knew someone who went to Harvard in 1984 and
when he was talking about women at his university he would refer to them as 
Radcliffe women *not* Harvard women.

I also went to Smith College.  Smith, Mt. Holyoke, Bryn Mawr, and Wellesley are
lucky because they have huge endowments so they will never have to go co-ed for
fiscal reasons.  I also think that in the case of Smith, if it were to go co-ed
over 50% of the alumnae would stop contributing.  Does anyone know what happened
with the Wheaton alumnae who started to sue the college to get their donations
back?  From what I read it seems like Wheaton did a massive fund raising 
campaign telling their alumnae that if they didn't contribute they would have 
to go co-ed.  When the trustees voted to go co-ed, many alums filed lawsuits.

I see the issue at Mills as to whether the students want to keep their school 
open or not.  If going co-ed will ruin the instituion for them and it is not 
worth keep the college open in that situation then perhaps it would be better 
to close and have the students transfer.

-- Nisha

    As a graduate of Wheaton, I recently received a college newsletter
    stating annual applications have quadrupled since the college has
    gone co-ed.  This is being considered a big win in that one of the
    pushes for the co-ed argument was "accept men or lower the admission
    standards."
    
    As for the alumni lawsuits that were threatened, I believe only a
    small minority followed though on them.  I don't recall the outcome,
    but had they won, there would not have been much of a financial
    impact on the college.
    
    Wheaton did do a massive fundraising just before the co-ed decision,
    but I never heard any threats of "contribute or we go co-ed".  The
    backlash was more due to a feeling that "you didn't tell us what you
    had in mind".
    
    As an alum, I had (have) mixed emotions about this issue.  I hated to
    see the changes that would inevitably occur with the admission of men;
    however, I would similarly find a lowering of the admission standards
    even more unacceptable.  It appeared that given the current socio-economic
    trends, Wheaton could not remain the same school it was when I attended;
    change was inevitable.  If the choices truly came down to: (a)  admit
    men (b) lower standards or (c) close the school, I believe they chose
    the best course (particularly as I have a daughter beginning to look
    at colleges).  
    
    I must also say I am impressed with the school's continued sensitivity 
    toward the subject.  They seem to be making a great effort to retain and
    promote a women's-issues-focused curriculum and intellectual atmosphere.  
    From what I've seen and heard, I feel better about it now than I did two 
    years ago, and I would be pleased to have my daughter (or sons!) attend 
    Wheaton.

    Mills College Board of Trustees voted to reconsider today.
    
    	-- Charles

    re:.25: Hi, Terri.  The Telegraph yesterday reported that Rivier is
    going coed next year.
    
    ed

Hi Ed!

Really?  Yesterday's Telegraph?  I'll have to pick up that
article.  Well- it wouldn't really be a change anyways.
Rivier, over the past few years, is fast becoming a suitcase 
college, geared more toward graduate studies than undergraduate
studies.

Terri

ps.  how's things up there?

[reprinted with permission]


	SAN FRANCISCO (UPI) -- The leaders of the alumni association at
strike-bound Mills College approved a plan aimed at blocking opening the
all-women's school to male students and a school leader he might
reconsider his support for the move.
	The five-point proposal from the Mills College Alumnae Association
includes raising $10 million in new endowments, said Alumnae Association
Director Linda Kay.
	The action came after the president of the Board of Trustees told a
group of alumnae earlier in the day that he would be willing to
reconsider his support for coeducation at the Oakland school starting in
the fall of 1991.
	F. Warren Hellman and Mills President Mary Metz announced May 3
that the trustees had voted to admit men to the college. They said a
majority of trustees supported all-female education but believed Mills
must admit men to increase enrollment. The college hopes to balance its
budget by increasing enrollment from the current 777 to 1,000 or more.
	Students declared a strike the morning after the announcement and
have shut down the school and boycotted classes ever since.
	Kay listed the five points of the plan:
	--Raise $10 million in new endowments.
	--Provide $750,000 in annual unrestricted gifts to the college
within three years. The last gift was $450,000.
	--Pledge 75 percent alumnae participation in three years and 50
percent in five years. Participation was 39 percent last year.
	--Form a task force of alumnae to develop and monitor a business
plan to accomplish the goals.
	--Renovation and fund-raising for historic Mills Hall, damaged by
the earthquake last October, will be postponed and contingent on
reaching these goals.
	``If (the goals) are not met by the three-to-five-year benchmarks,
we will not oppose Mills becoming a coed college,'' Kay said.
	Hellman had said earlier that the women must come up with plans to
add significantly to the $72 million endowment and increase annual
giving and the numbers of Mills' donors by at least 50 percent.
	He also suggested landmarks that were developed in the plan.
	``It can't be entirely back-end loaded, where we're going to have a
miracle in the fifth year,'' he said.
	The strike continued Tuesday but after hearing of Wellman's
statements, strike spokeswoman Deborah Egbert said, ``That's a pleasant
and wonderful surprise.''
	A few minutes later, loud cheers and applause outside Egbert's
Student Union office showed other students had heard the news.
	Mills' faculty voted 42-21 Monday to ask the trustees to delay
their coeducation decision by five years. In that time, they promised to
``assume the burden of proof that changes in recruitment strategies,
curriculum and scheduling will raise enrollment.'' They also offered to
do free extra teaching.
	``We would like to express our unanimous appreciation to the
students and alumnae for their actions in this crisis,'' Kay said, ``and
to the faculty of Mills for its willingness to make special sacrifices
for continuation of women's education at Mills.''
	She said she did not know when a formal proposal will be made, but
the trustees will meet Thursday and Friday of next week.

    Mike, surely you don't mean to say that we women with university
    degrees are paid 6% more than our male peers in general, do you?
    
    I believe your $1.06 -vs- $1.00 datum is for engineering graduates in
    their first job.  That disparity was reported by the IEEE, but they
    they went on to point out that women steadily lose ground thereafter.
    
    						=maggie

�	If women are then losing ground to men in the business world,
�    maybe there's some other reason, besides sexual discrimination for
�    that.
    
    Can you suggest some, Mike?  I only know the findings of IEEE, APA, and
    Labor Department studies.  They can hypothetically account for part of
    the variance by reference to factors such as interrupted careers, but
    after all such sources of variance are controlled, there remains a
    residual disparity for which there is no legitimate explanation.
    
�	As far as addressing whether or not women now have equal access
�    to the job market, and equal pay (at least upon entry), it seems to
�    me that for recent college graduates, the answer is "yes".
                                                                           
    Wherever did you get such a sweeping and general conclusion from, Mike? 
    
    						=maggie

    Jings, Mike, y'got me.  I'm speechless.

    Regarding Rivier, a few notes back, my mother works there and as she
    understands it, the reason for the change (beyond more money that is)
    is to allow the night students to get a degree from there. Currently,
    night students may take courses at Rivier and transfer the credits to
    another school. THey may not get a degree from the college through the
    night program. The exception being the nursing program, I believe.
    
    Anyway, that's the story as I heard it and the source is MY MOM. So
    nobody go contradiciting her. Y'hear. :-) :-)
    
                                   Phil

    Hunh?  I'm in the Undergraduate Evening School at Riv, and my degree
    will be from Riv...not some other college.  Or are you saying so that
    the male students can obtain a degree from the day program rather than
    the night program?  All male undergrads today are enrolled in the
    eveing program, but may attend a certain number of courses per semester
    in the day program.
    
    The contortions they've been using to admit men to the day school
    (Undergraduate School for Women) has been pretty silly IMHO.  I'm
    pleased they've decided to go co-ed.  
    
    Marge

    Marge, I am just repeating what my mother said. I think you are right
    about the men and the day program though. Sorry for any confusion.
    
                                  Phil

    Next week's TIME (arrived yesterday) has an article on this issue.  One
    very interesting point that was made was that the quality of education
    at Wheaton for females has gone down since going co-ed!  They said that
    faculty spends much more time with the male students than with the
    female students, and the female students have suffered.  So, .19, it
    looks like your junior high experience doesn't have much to do with
    university work.
    
    RE .44, Mike, yes is does "prepare them for the real world, where there
    are men."  In the same article, they state that the vast majority of
    women executives are graduate of all-female colleges/universities.
    
    I will try to post the article tomorrow.
    
    Someone asked how we feel about all-male schools, and I, too, echo
    Jody's reply.
    
    
    Susan

    I had heard that it was only the daycare/nursery school at the
    Presentation in Hudson that was closing. If you have heard different
    I'd be curious as to the details. Once again I got the info from mom
    and she could be wrong again. Hmm maybe the the powers in Hudson will
    try to buy it this time and not have the fiasco at the friary like
    before. DEC got a nice piece of land. But, this is a topic for the NH
    Notesfile , so I'll shutup.
    
    Phil

    Reprinted without permission from TIME Magazine, May 21, 1990.
    
    Dollars, Scholars and Gender  by Susan Tifft
    
    The earthquake that rattled the San Francisco Bay Area last fall caused
    $7 milion worth of damage at Mills College, a 138-year-old women's
    school in Oakland.  But the tremors set off by the college's decision
    to boost revenue by accepting men have shaken Mills' foundations more
    severely than any natural disaster.
    
    Last week students, many sporting yellow armbands and BETTER DEAD THAN
    COED T shirts, continued to boycott classes and blockade buildings. 
    The faculty (51% women, 49% men) volunteered to recruit more female
    students and teach more courses at no extra cost if the trustees would
    permit Mills to remain an all-female enclave.  Alumnae pledged to raise
    an additional $10 million in endowment over the next five years.  In
    response to the pressure, Mills president Mary Metz announced that the
    trustees might reconsider their decision if faculty, staff and students
    came up with bolder proposals to bolster the school's finances.
    
    There is scant precedent for such a reversal.  Goaded by financial
    necessity, women's colleges have increasingly been forced to choose
    between two futures:  going coed or going under.  Since 1960 the number
    of such schools has dwindled from 298 to 93, with more dominoes poised
    to fall.  "Women still perceive a need to separate-sex education," says
    Donna Shavlik, director of women in higher education at the American
    Council in Education.  "But whether colleges can continue to offer it
    and still maintain their economic health is another question."
    
    Mills' health is especially precarious.  The undergraduate student body
    has withered to 777, more an 200 shy of the 1,000 total the
    administration claims is necessary to balance its $23 million annual
    operating budget.  Says Mills board chariman Warren Hellman: "In five
    or six years we would be heading into a death spiral."  The school's
    location only intensifies its recruitment problems.  With tuition at
    $11,900, Mills often loses students to well-regarded state schools like
    the University of California, Berkeley, just ten miles away, where
    yearly fees total only $1,500.
    
    Women's colleges in general have been squeezed by two powerful trends. 
    One is the baby bust of the late 1960s and '70s, which has meant a
    shrinking pool of college-age youngsters.  Single-sex schools get a
    crack at only half that decreasing market.  The other is the declining
    popularity of women-only education.  Currently, just 3% to 11% of high
    school women say they would consider a women's college.  Taken
    together, these changes have made it difficult for many all-female
    colleges to attract enough students to keep themselves afloat.
    
    The demise of some women's colleges, however, has breathed new life
    into others.  Although the total number of students at such schools has
    slipped from 250,000 to 125,000 during the past 20 years, these women
    today are spread over a smaller number of institutions, boosting head
    counts at many of them.  Since 1970, undergraduate enrollment at the
    surviving women's colleges has shot up more than 18%.  Two of the
    strongest, Wellesley and Bryn Mawr, enjoyed a 6% surge in applications
    this year.
    
    Ironically, the case for single-sex education for women has never been
    more compelling.  According to the Washington-based Women's College
    Coalition, all-female schools have produced one-third of the female
    board members of Fortune 1000 companies.  In science and math, an
    single-gender environment has proved particularly nurturing.  More than
    5% of women at all-female schools major in the life sciences, for
    instance, compared with only 3.6% of women at coed schools.
    
    The financial gains that go along with coeducation may come at the
    price of women's achievement.  A recent study of Wheaton College, which
    went coed in 1988, showed that the school's men tended to get the
    lion's share of attention from faculty.  "You lose something in the
    process of going coed," says Peter Mirijanian, spokesman for the
    Women's College Coalition.  "You can't have it both ways."
    
    For the all-female schools that remain, survival will require tough
    choices.  To help brighten up its bottom line, Bryn Mawr decided three
    years ago to phase out several graduate departments, pare faculty and
    staff, and gradually increase its undergraduate enrollment from 1,000
    to 1,200.  Russell Sage, in Troy, NY, has repositioned itself,
    aggressively courting "resumers" - women over 25 - who make up 22% of
    its undergraduates.
    
    At fiscally weak schools, such tactics may only postpone the
    inevitable.  The turmois at Mills could soon be repeated at
    Pittsburgh's Chatham College, a tiny (615 students) liberal arts
    school, whose trustees are scheduled to vote in October on whether to
    admit men.  To many young women to rush to coeducation has created a
    disturbing, and unjustified, diminution of educational choices. 
    "Women's colleges have not become obsolete," maintains Catie Hancock,
    21, a Bryn Mawr junior.  "It is other factors that kill these schools. 
    It's so sad."
    
    With reporting by Kathleen Brady/New York and Paul A. Witteman/Oakland
    
    [please excuse any typos!]

From UPI via Clarinet, with permission.
    
    	-- Charles


	OAKLAND, Calif. (UPI) -- Mills College trustees, bowing to outraged
students, faculty and alumnae, voted Friday to reverse a decision to
admit men to the financially emperiled women's college.
	Students on the 138-year-old college's campus hugged and cheered as
board Chairman Warren Helman announced the decision by the 33-member
board of trustees, which met at a secret location.
	The students had staged a two-week strike after the original
decision was announced May 3, drawing support from women's groups
nationwide and focusing attention on the diminishing number of U.S.
women's colleges.
	More than two-thirds of the 300 women's colleges in existence 20
years ago have turned coeducational, merged or closed.
	The students on Thursday ended their protest -- including a blockade
of administration buildings that interfered with campus operations and a
boycott that wiped out five days of classes -- as a gesture ``of good
faith'' to the trustees.
	``We are victorious,'' student leader Anna Stravato declared even
before the trustee vote. ``We have made our point. ... This strike is a
dam stemming the tide of closings of women's colleges across the
country.''
	Trustees voted on May 3 to turn Mills coeducational beginning in
the fall of 1991, but began backing away from the decision after upset
students and alumnae objected.
	The trustees promised to reconsider their decision if presented
with a plan that would ensure Mills' economic survival as an all-women's
college.
	Representatives of students, faculty, staff and alumnae on Thursday
presented proposals to the board's executive committee on specific ways
each group could help with recruitment and cost-cutting.
	The proposed solutions ranged from promoting Mills at high schools
to increasing faculty course loads and class sizes and raising the
amount and number of alumnae donations.
	Trustees decided to add men to the student body because efforts to
raise the school's enrollment of women to 1,000 had failed. The current
undergraduate enrollment is 777.
	The problem, trustees said, was attracting more qualified women at
a time when the number of high school graduates is shrinking and
interest in single-sex education is waning.
	In six days of intensive telephone campaigning, more than $3
million in five-year pledges was raised. Many alumnae threatened to
withhold future contributions if Mills went coeducational.

    Again, if there was another coeducational college offering similar
    courses within a reasonable distance, which was of equal caliber, I
    would have no problem.
    
    And, I believe Mills does allow men to attend their evening programs -
    so it's not completely women.
    
    -Jody
    

    I agree with Jody.  It would be OK.  
    
    The major push to get prestigious universities co-ed in the first place
    was a shortage of opportunities for good education for women.  Now that
    most universities are co-ed, do you hear a lot of pushing by women to
    get the remaining men-only places closed down?  No.  
    
    And, again, a better analogy (for power differential reasons) would be
    for a prestigious all-black college to strive to remain all-black.  
    
    If a <group-only> college 1) meets a need for <group> and 2) _good_
    alternatives are available to <nongroup>, what is wrong with it?  
    
    Pam

    
    re .61
    
    Not true. Look at the Citadel and VMI imbroglios...
    
    We both know very well that a double standard is at work..

    Robert,
    
    That's right.  One for private schools that admit only one gender,
    and one for public schools, funded by state taxation, which only
    admit one gender.
    
    							Ann B.

    re: .66 mike z
    
    I went to a women's college and I got government-backed student loans.
    I'm paying them back.  So?
    
    Read .5 in this string for tax DISADVANTAGES paid for by private
    single-sex schools.
    
    o  VMI is paid for directly with tax dollars (paid by men and women
       in the state) and is single sex.
    
    o  Mills is paid for privately (including donations from former 
       female alums), does *not* get tax breaks from the government as
       co-ed institutions do, and is single sex.
    
    The two cases are not identical.
    
    Pam

    re: .64
    
    look, he asked my opinion, I gave him my opinion.  No double standard. 
    I'm not involved in any of these imbroglios.  My note still holds.
    
    -Jody
    

    Mike
    
    Here is a try on my part...
    
    a state school, i.e. directly subsidised by the tax payers giving
    cheaper tuitions shouldn't be single sex or race or religion
    unless there is some valid gender/religous/race related reason
    for same. (and I right now, cannot imagine what those might be
    but I can postulate that they could exist.)
    
    a private school, i.e. supported by tuition and endowments etc.
    not directly by the tax payers, should have the right to offer
    education to the  group of their choice, be they vegetarians,
    Seventh Day Adventists, Blacks, men, women, etc..
    
    I believe we have the right of freedom of association guaranteed
    in our consitution.
    
    I personally support small social clubs that do not serve as
    restuarants or bars to the general public that wish to form
    associations by particular groups be they cribbage players,
    good old boys, women who like to knit, or vietnamese refugees.
    If people wish to gather and socialize with people they are
    comfortable with and it causes no business or educational hardship
    to those excluded then fine.
    
    The same goes for schools. Fundamentalists and vegetarians and women
    and men and blue fuzzed aliens can start schools for their kids or
    maintain them at what ever level with my support and blessing.
    
    Bonnie

    Mike
    
    my personal definition would be schools that are identified as
    state supported...
    
    not schools  that may get a grant or two from the state government..
    
    I think that if someone wants to start a private school for seventh
    day adventists or vegetarians that if they are other wise qualified
    for limited state or federal grants or funds, they should not be denied
    same ...
    
    I'd support the Citidel or VMI being all male were they not essentialy
    state colleges, and further there is no equivalent state school for
    women who wish to get mitlitary training.
    
    Bonnie

    Mike
    
    the University of Massachusetts is a state supported school, as
    are the universities of every other state..
    
    as are the community colleges here in Mass, and several other
    colleges and Universities..
    
    rather than relying on endowments, fund rasiers, and tuition, the
    major operating expenses of these schools come out of the taxes
    collected by the state and the budget and expenses of the college
    are allocated by the state legislature..
    
    I'd have thought this was obvious..
    
    what is missing?
    
    BJ

I think what Mike is asking is "what counts as state support?"

For example, if I run a school for fuzzy aliens and I get no money from the
state, then I am obviously NOT state supported.

If the state pays all my costs from tax monies and other revenues, then I am
obviously totally state supported.

But what if I get a grant from the state which covers approximately 33% of my
costs? For example, the state pays me so that the local (state) school can share
the use of some facilities at my school.   Am I state supported?  

What about 10%?  What about 51%?   Or does it depend on what the state is 
funding? EG, if the state is funding two teachers at the school to teach a 
subject which I would not otherwise cover, am I state supported regardless of 
the amount of money involved????

    My take on Bonnie's answer.......
    
    If the school's budget is overseen by a state legislative body,
    or a body nominated by the state legislature, it is a state-supported
    school.
    
    If the school's budget is overseen by a body which is responsible
    *only to the school*, it is not a state-supported school.
    
    Alison

    
    Which school was started on behalf of blue fuzz aliens?
    
    Was it Harvey Mudd College?

    re: .79 (Bob)
    
    Tsk!  "Harvey Mudd" College.  Do you mean Harry Mudd College
    (as in the inimitable Harcourt Fenton Mudd)?
    
    Steve

    If they're fuzzy aliens it may have been Cyrano Jones...
    
    But the classrooms would be pretty small in that case...
    
    -Jody
    

    RE: .79
    
    Having dated a guy from Harvey Mudd, yes, most definitely the
    fuzzy blue alien college.
    
    But boy, could he dance!
    
      :^)   Margaret
    
            (Joel, if you're out there somewhere reading this, HI!)

> Not only is Rivier College going coed for next year, but the Catholic girls'
>high school in Hudson is closing. Tough times for all female education.

>The Doctah

    "Tough times for all female education."
    
    Well, just because some female dominated schools are closing doesn't
    mean that all female education is going down the tubes, does it ?
    
    I mean, isn't there going to be some female education left ?
    
    BobE
    

    re: .83  BobE
    
    I think the meaning was "all-female" education.  Education of females
    in a single-sex environment...
    
    Pam

    re: "perfectly explained"
    
    Guess we can chalk up another plus-mark for the excellence of
    all-female education!  :-)
    
    Pam
    Mount Holyoke College