Women's Colleges
I went to Goucher College in Baltimore when it was all female. At that time Goucher was the sister college of Johns Hopkins, which at the time was all male. I did not really think that had anything to do with my career choice until i started reading some of the literature about 20 years ago, and found a lot of studies showing women's colleges have contributed disproportionately more women to science and math for many years and still do. So, the question is why?
Sonia Pressman Fuentes told me back in September about an article in The Washington Post by Selena Rezvani, a Barnard graduate, on why women's college continue to survive, although they are not thriving. Only sixty still exist, serving less than 2% of the total college population according to her article. I quote from the part about why they continue to attract students:"while women's college graduates make up only a small minority of the college-educated population, one-third of the women board members of the Fortune 1000 companies are women's college graduates, and women's college graduates are twice as likely to earn Ph.D.s., more often going on to study the sciences and attend medical school. Of Business Week's list of rising women stars in corporate America, 30 percent are women's college graduates and of women members of Congress, 20 percent attended women's colleges."
These findings make a strong case for women's colleges, but the question still is, why do they work, and can we bottle that essence and use it everywhere? Or is single sex the essential variable? Rezvani goes on to describe efforts underway to make small supportive women's units in larger institutions, such as at Duke University where the women in the Baldwin Scholars Program work together and also try to enhance the experience at Duke for other women.
Rezvani points out that Cinderella, Rapunzel, and Snow White got into predicaments and then depended on men to rescue them, while today's women leaders must self-start, must be able to jump into action and not await rescue. That quality seems to be the special ingredient that women gain from going to women's colleges. To engage in a bit of mordant wit, at women's colleges, we have to take action because there's no one else there to do it. So we learn that we can, that we succeed, that our voices are important, that people are interested in following where we lead. I think women can learn that elsewhere, but I can no longer deny that I left Goucher with the conviction that I was up to the job. Whatever expectations Yale had for me in graduate school, I felt that I could perform. That may be an essential ingredient in willingness to persist in science and math.
What do you think?
A I don't think it's essential; I didn't go to a women's college and I still felt empowered
B Women's college graduates seemed more confident among the women in my graduate school but I don't have enough data to decide.
C Yes, I have seen this trend a lot and believe it's true.
D I think other ways can be found to increase women's confidence.
It's not the end of the world Scifeminista:) I agree that there are plenty of other opportunities to intervene in co-ed education. In my case it was an amazing mentor in the faculty member I worked with to complete my undergrad thesis. I had never thought of getting a PhD until I worked with him. He was tough but fair, kind but firm, and never, ever raised his voice to make a point even when badgered by his colleagues during talks. I still try to live up to his example.
It sounds like the self-doubt that can be created by competing with men at this critical age negatively affects one's whole life. I would think subsequent events would have some influence too, such as a supportive grad advisor or postdoc mentor.
I somehow have several friends who went to Wellesley at various different times and they all seem to be very comfortable with themselves, so I pick C too.
It's sad that there are so few women's colleges left. I think Radcliffe was absorbed into Harvard, right? And Vassar went co-ed? I think Smith is still all female, though. One of the few!
C. I have met some amazing women scientists who came out of single sex undergraduate colleges. They have such a composure and level of confidence that is really special. Women achieve more and become better leaders when it's just them. If I am fortunate enough to be the parent of a daughter, I will ask her to strongly consider attending a women's college. I think she would get so much more out of it as a future scientist. Although if she's the child of a scientist, I doubt she will want to follow in my footsteps:)
Hi Mica Woman,
I think people do focus a lot on the size more than the unisex nature, and think that self-confidence comes from being in a small pond. Goucher was small and female, and your place was small and co-ed...maybe that was the most important difference. There could be others, but the general trend is in favor of confidence building by female only colleges. But students don't choose them very often any more, maybe because of the reason suggested by mad hatter.
cheers,
Laura
Hi mad hatter,
I don't know if single sex education is better for men. For some reason I never focused on that aspect of the data, although I'm sure it would be there to see in the small colleges for men only, at least back 40 years ago or so. One could compare the graduates of Amherst which was all male with those of say William and Mary or try to get exactly matched GRE scores and see if there were differences between men's and co-ed schools.
cheers,
Laura
I'm with C, too. My self-confidence from a small co-ed college was much too small to thrive at a top grad school.
What about men, Laura? Is it better for them to go to single sex schools too? I always thought it better to be around people of both genders at this critical time in one's mental development.
I went to a women's college and I am not sure it mattered, but I did feel more confident than a lot of the other students in my grad program, both women and men. Maybe it's true. I'll pick C.
