<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps someone more concerned with all the good reasons for selecting a college than with what other people think?</p>
<p>YK, annasdad, if my criteria had been “what would all my neighbors think,” I wouldn’t have sent my daughter to Wellesley since few people around here seem to know what it is, and it’s greeted with a “huh? what’s that?”. I think I’ve made it quite clear in the history of my posting that I think basing college decisions on what the neighbors might think is stupid. So, let me rephrase. It is one thing to send your kid to a school that the “neighbors might not know” if everything points to that school being a good school (which certainly fits Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, Smith, Mt H and Barnard if the topic is women’s colleges). It’s quite another thing to send your kid to a school that no one knows if when you kick the tires, it doesn’t appear to be a particularly good school. When we kicked the tires of Sweet Briar, it wasn’t impressive in terms of the caliber of student it admitted or the opportunities it provided.</p>
<p>“Unknown among the masses” is of little consequence to me. “Unknown among the people who know better” is of much more consequence to me.</p>
<p>^^ well said Pizzagirl - you draw the distinction nicely</p>
<p>CrewDad-</p>
<p>[One</a> in four, maybe six | Yale Daily News](<a href=“http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2010/feb/10/one-in-four-maybe-six/]One”>http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2010/feb/10/one-in-four-maybe-six/)</p>
<p>Can’t vouch for the methodology, though.</p>
<p>… waiting for the response to PG’s well reasoned post to have the cut/pasted quote referencing the 2005 Pascarella and Terenzini article… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, i never said otherwise. What I object to is the idea that single-sex education is “dying.” If so, it’s the longest death in history. The all-female element is less important that the school’s geography, endowment and appeal in other areas. </p>
<p>Most college-age kids are not going to be interested in single-sex education, for a variety of reasons. That’s fine. I still think there will be a niche for it.</p>
<p>It seems to me that a big difference between Smith and Sweet Briar is that some students will go to Smith in spite of the fact that it is single-sex. I think that’s much less likely to be the case at Sweet Briar.</p>
<p>I see your point, NJSue, and agree that the inflammatory title of some old article from 3 years ago that Barrons posted is hardly a reason to claim that they are “dying”. But sadly, there are fewer single sex colleges. But they are an important niche, agree entirely.</p>
<p>The number of all-male colleges has also declined.</p>
<p>Whoa- it’s from 3 years ago?
No, just checked: May 6. But, they began reviewing several years ago. </p>
<p>Don’t underestimate the draw S, MHC, B and BM have because of cross-reg. You don’t necessarily choose Smith despite single sex. The proximity of men makes these schools a whole different environment. Best of both worlds.</p>
<p>The article linked in post #4 is 3 years old. The article I posted re: single sex colleges is a year old. The article about Sweet Briar is current.Hope that helps</p>
<p>I can certainly attest that many of D’s W classmates were choosing between W and co-ed schools - in other words, that they were making choices among top academic institutions, some of which were single-sex and others of which were co-ed. I can certainly say that D didn’t approach her search with “single-sex first, now let’s look within single-sex schools” - and that while her final list included several single-sex schools, her sweet spot was more a certain type of LAC. </p>
<p>Anyway, I don’t see whether it matters if single-sex colleges is general are growing or not. Nothing wrong with a niche. Something for everybody.</p>
<p>“Dying” is a relative term. Lot’s of great last hurrahs in the last years, and we are all “dying” . I think the female schools have suffered a loss in selectivity. There was a period of much upheaval as schools debated what direction they should go in terms of staying single sex or going coed. Things seem to have stabilized now. However, they seem to have lost their lustre somewhat in that given the same price and other selective choices, in this area, most of the girls seem to be choosing the coed schools, even the ones coming from single sex high schools.</p>
<p>It’s not like they are writing new articles about the decline of WC’s every day. It’s old news now. Why WOULD they? The pattern is well established and clear. </p>
<p>[List</a> of current and historical women’s universities and colleges in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_and_historical_women’s_universities_and_colleges_in_the_United_States]List">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_and_historical_women’s_universities_and_colleges_in_the_United_States)</p>
<p>What’s your dog in this race, barrons? Just curious. Some here have daughters at s/s or who considered them. Some of us went to one.</p>
<p>I have homes in Lynchburg which was home to RMWC–now RC after a contentious decision to go coed and SWeet Briar is just up the road. So I see what is happening to them with concern as to how it might impact the area.</p>
<p>I wonder if the real story is really about single-sex colleges - or about underfunded private schools struggling with declining enrollments for various reasons, who then need to make cuts to their programs. The article linked by the OP mentions the single-sex nature of Sweet Briar, but doesn’t really dwell on it; it was the provocative thread title that shifted the discussion, I think.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>That is what I said upthread! Some parts of the article (Parker’s quotations) address the scope of the problems.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The reality is that few schools are sheltered from the economic downturn. Don’t we have a long running thread about the endowment problems at the … richest schools in the country? Aren’t some describing austerity programs at Harvard? </p>
<p>Fwiw, the financial issues will not get better in the near future. The current issues have somewhat been tempered by the combination of government special programs and the tail end of the children of baby boomers. The pool of applicants will not continue to fuel growing applications. Although the most prestigious schools continue to attract massive applications (and maintain a reasonable yield) we can note that the growth of application at the Ivy League plus Stanford and MIT has reversed, and this for the first time in years. </p>
<p>Changes in the college landscape are coming, and there will be a number of casualties and a number of survivors that changed their image and niches.</p>
<p>I would say whatever problems are happening at the non Top 50 or so smaller private colleges are as bad or worse at the non Top 15 or so all female colleges.</p>
<p>^ evidence??</p>
<p>Just my opinion. Evidence to the contrary?</p>