Now let’s talk about the second alternative:
The writer doesn’t support this solution and I can understand him. But here are some possible arguments and adjustments the institute could follow.
First, before Dana-Hall decides to integrate co-education it should engage in some market research to learn what the other 4 remaining all-girl schools are planning to do. If the institute finds out that say two out of four are already in developing negotiations to open their doors to male applicants or enter into a merger agreement, Dana-Halls commitment to all-girls education may be needed more than ever. An event such as this would increase the pool of female applicants by at least 50%, enabling Dana-Hall to increase performance dramatically.
Even if only one out of the four other schools changes direction it would be something to think about.
Secondly, although a campus of 55 acres of prime land in an upper-class suburb, plus a number of fine buildings attracts the quality female students, it could be beneficial to sell the entire property and move into a cheaper and smaller location. Though, the new location must still be by all means at a comparable value to the others schools to avoid withdrawals. This move could have potential expense cuts, especially if the complex includes fewer rooms and unusable space. But Dana-Hall must not forget to maintain the same excellent academic programs and provide and enjoyable living environment that still is a key