Are all-womens colleges on the wane?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Go for it! I'm a Smith alumna and would encourage all bright, young women to consider it. One of the most attractive features is the commitment to financial aid. Smith is an expensive private school, but is committed to keeping it accessible to all families. Average total debt after 4 years is under $25K.

PP here. That sounds awesome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Do you mean applications? It's enough to keep the schools open but not great compared to a Williams with 8000 applications, much less an Ivy.

[Anonymous]

I think smaller women's colleges are shutting or going co-ed, but they do have a legacy pull. That said, seven sisters will always be competitive due to their high quality education and history of educating women from elite families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, all male schools are almost totally extinct. Guess boys don't like being around their own kind- go figure.

PaleoCon here
This is BS. The Ivy League went co-ed because of pressure from Feminists. Feminists demanded admission to Ivy League schools. There was actually a story about this in The Atlantic a few months ago. Students at the all-male Ivys didn't want the schools to go co-ed. All of these top colleges went co-ed because their administrations had progressive/egalitarian agendas. Title 9 destroyed everything. Now look at what's being done to all-male social clubs at Harvard. The insane Leftist administration is trying to force these all-male clubs. to go co-ed in the name of "progress" It always amuses me when I hear stuff like "women need a supportive environment." Why is all the focus always on women? What about guys like me who want a traditional all-male experience for college? I wish there were a college today that was similar to Oxford or Harvard in 1900. No such college exists. The only option I have is Hampden-Sydney, and that school's full of drunks who don't take academics seriously. There are elite women's colleges like Wellesley and Barnard, but no elite men's colleges. This is just part of the reason I'm passionately anti-feminist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think smaller women's colleges are shutting or going co-ed, but they do have a legacy pull. That said, seven sisters will always be competitive due to their high quality education and history of educating women from elite families.

The intellectual laziness is out of control here. No wonder we have so many people believing fake news stories like the Comet Ping Pong sex ring story.

PP, re-read your first sentence. Could you have taken a minute to research whether women's colleges are shutting down before spouting some possible fact that you "think?" Either there is a trend that smaller women's colleges are shutting down or there isn't. It isnt something you "think."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, all male schools are almost totally extinct. Guess boys don't like being around their own kind- go figure.

PaleoCon here
This is BS. The Ivy League went co-ed because of pressure from Feminists. Feminists demanded admission to Ivy League schools. There was actually a story about this in The Atlantic a few months ago. Students at the all-male Ivys didn't want the schools to go co-ed. All of these top colleges went co-ed because their administrations had progressive/egalitarian agendas. Title 9 destroyed everything. Now look at what's being done to all-male social clubs at Harvard. The insane Leftist administration is trying to force these all-male clubs. to go co-ed in the name of "progress" It always amuses me when I hear stuff like "women need a supportive environment." Why is all the focus always on women? What about guys like me who want a traditional all-male experience for college? I wish there were a college today that was similar to Oxford or Harvard in 1900. No such college exists. The only option I have is Hampden-Sydney, and that school's full of drunks who don't take academics seriously. There are elite women's colleges like Wellesley and Barnard, but no elite men's colleges. This is just part of the reason I'm passionately anti-feminist.

What is it that you need at an all-male school that you couldn't get at a co-ed school, PaleoCon? What support do you need? Is there some access that you're denied at a co-ed school? Is there a power structure at the co-ed school that prevents you from achieving your potential? Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Do you mean applications? It's enough to keep the schools open but not great compared to a Williams with 8000 applications, much less an Ivy.

This is number of applicants. All the admissions data is found online with their common data sets.

[Anonymous]

Not bad. With healthy endowments too. Not sure they are "shuttering" soon. https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-seven-sisters-colleges-ranked-1478888001?client=safari

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Do you mean applications? It's enough to keep the schools open but not great compared to a Williams with 8000 applications, much less an Ivy.

Williams endowment: 2.2B, Smith 1.8B, Wellesley 1.8B. These are 2015 numbers. Hardly in danger of closing, but nice try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not bad. With healthy endowments too. Not sure they are "shuttering" soon. https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-seven-sisters-colleges-ranked-1478888001?client=safari

I can't read this. I don't have a subscription to the WSJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Do you mean applications? It's enough to keep the schools open but not great compared to a Williams with 8000 applications, much less an Ivy.

The # of applications received is not indicative of the quality of education. In any case, a single-sex school will by definition have fewer applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Common Data Set show healthy admission numbers to me: 5000+ Smith, 7,000 Barnard, 5000 for Wellesley. My daughter is looking at male dominated field, and the prospect of studying at all all women's college is appealing - small class sizes, beautiful campus, generous merit aid in some cases. Also, the Wellesley-MIT, Smith-Princeton, Barnard-Columbia programs that allow cross studying opps is very appealing.

Do you mean applications? It's enough to keep the schools open but not great compared to a Williams with 8000 applications, much less an Ivy.

The # of applications received is not indicative of the quality of education. In any case, a single-sex school will by definition have fewer applicants.

The original topic question addressed if women's colleges were on the wane. Number is applications received for any given year does tell one part of the story. Quality of education is complicated and can be best answered by graduation numbers, jobs, internships, post grad education...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not bad. With healthy endowments too. Not sure they are "shuttering" soon. https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-seven-sisters-colleges-ranked-1478888001?client=safari

I can't read this. I don't have a subscription to the WSJ.

Long story short: Wellesley is ranked #30 overall by WSJ (out over 1,000 colleges ranked) and is the #1 seven sister school. Smith is ranked #2 seven sister school, and ranked #35 overall by WSJ.

[Anonymous]

Well, Sweet Briar announced its closure (before reversing it at the last minute), so I do think some women's colleges are having a tough time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, Sweet Briar announced its closure (before reversing it at the last minute), so I do think some women's colleges are having a tough time.

True, but Sweet Briar ain't a Seven Sister School.