<p>We just got back from looking at a few different colleges (this is my second time around, I have a son at Vassar) and Amherst was fantastic. The weather was horrible and originally we thought that we would just go to the info session and skip the tour. But my son was so impressed with the info session which was so refreshingly honest and sincere (thank you!) that we trudged through campus in the pouring rain. When a kid loves the school despite skipping lunch, sitting in traffic and avoiding mud puddles, you knwo its real! But despite reading all the good information and the excellent tour guide, we still have a few specific questions.
1- Athlete vs non-athlete…I know its a stereotype and I know people will come out on all sides of this and I am not trying to incite controversy. But while my son has played some sports and loves watching professional sports, he is not interested in going to a school that is divided or dominated by athletes. He does not attend the football games in HS and still has a very active social life. His brother was anti-sports altogether and chose Vassar and now feels like he is overrun by theater people…so I knwo nothing is perfect
2- Film - he was very impressed with the number of faculty listed in the film department for such a small school and is intrigued by the 5 college consortium to give him greater access to other film departments. But at the info session we were told that a very small % of students actually take advantage of that benefit. Has anyone majored or minored in film at Amherst? We have crossed Williams off the list of prospects because they do not have a film department. My son really wants a LAC with a film dept, not a film school. But we will also look at Wesleyan even though my older son hated it (for no real reason)
3- Jewish life - he is not very religious, but I do want him to feel comfortable and have things available to him during he holidays
So if anyone can shed some light, I would appreciate it</p>
<p>I can provide some feedback on the athlete/non athlete stereotype. Definitely there are many athletes in this school. As most athletes in any school, they do tend to host many parties. However, breaking the stereotype, most of the athletes are as smart as the general student body and many (maybe most?) wouldn’t even have needed the athlete bump to have been accepted. I think that a person’s social life in Amherst, as in any place, is primarily dependent on the individual’s personality. I personally know many people who are not involved with athletics, but are able to get along perfectly well with the majority of students. I even think these people (non athletes) comprise the majority, since only 33% of the students are varsity athletes (I think). Also, you don’t need to be an athlete to have a healthy social life. that is entirely dependent upon the individual and the people he chooses as friends. Many (most?) athlete parties are open to the general student body on the weekends and it is generally easy to find something to do on a weekend night.
the final point being: the athlete divide is not as stark as many people make it to be. Your son’s social life will be dependent upon himself, and it is easy to find one’s niche in a place as open and generally friendly as Amherst. </p>
<p>My son was recently accepted to Amherst and attended the overnight Open House last week. He had never been to the campus before, but by the time the Open House was over, he LOVED Amherst. He loved the campus, the students, the science program (his interest is chemistry), even the town. He is not an athlete; he is the quirky intellectual/musical type with a great sense of humor. He really “clicked” with a lot of people, and now he is down to choosing between Amherst and an ivy he was accepted to that he will be visiting next week. It sounds like Amherst was open and friendly, and that many types of students would be happy there. Good luck!</p>
<p>My son attended and loved Amherst. He is an unusual kid and the school – faculty and administration – supported him in whatever ways he asked. He chose it over some other very good schools and could not have been happier with his choice.</p>
<p>Athletes. He was not an athlete but played intramural sports. Something of a self-proclaimed nerd. He is seriously intellectual and we gather from his friends that the other kids thought he was one of the smartest kids at Amherst. He would agree with student970 that the athletes were generally as strong academically as the non-athletes. His freshman roommate was a hockey player, who moved into a dorm with other hockey players. After freshman year, his social circles probably were disproportionately non-athlete. There was definitely some social bifurcation along the athlete/non-athlete lines but he did not consider it an issue or any kind of problem.</p>
<p>Jewish life. Not sure. He never went but I think the Hillel is affiliated with Smith. I don’t think there would be any discomfort. We encouraged him to go to something, but that just wasn’t him. His sister, on the other hand, is president of the Hillel at her school. Who knows.</p>
<p>@pinchyBoo65, I was struck with the diversity of his friends. He made friends with many types of kids – girls with purple hair, athletes, politicos, and very diverse friends (straight/gay/trans; white, black, Hispanic, Asian; and kids from the US, Europe, Asia, etc.). The comfort he gained in have friendships with all different kinds of people will serve him well in life (he grew up in a pretty non-diverse suburb).</p>