<p>i'm thinking wellesley or smith, they seem to be the most science-oriented...
which all-women school has the best premed track?</p>
<p>Mount Holyoke also has a long reputation in the sciences, and, I’m told, there are a lot (relatively) at Scripps as well.</p>
<p>
[Alex’s</a> Illicit Guide to Medical School Admissions: a Trusted Source for Premed Students](<a href=“http://www.bestpremed.com/index.php]Alex’s”>http://www.bestpremed.com/index.php)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Medical</a> School: Advice on Medical Careers and on becoming a Doctor for High School Students](<a href=“http://www.bestpremed.com/hs.php#BAchoice]Medical”>http://www.bestpremed.com/hs.php#BAchoice)</p>
<p>I can’t speak to the other women’s colleges, but Smith’s pre-med program is very good.</p>
<p>Mount Holyoke or Smith, hands-down. Both have some of the most exceptional science facilities in the country.</p>
<p>I would say Wellesley or Bryn Mawr. Bryn Mawr is top ten of liberal arts colleges for top med school acceptances and the summer premed program is, from what I’ve heard, phenomenal.</p>
<p>Smith is exceptionally strong and so is Mount Holyoke. Their rate of acceptance for students who apply are actually around 90% whereas both schools have about ~3% of the graduating class going into med school. That is really high, considering most colleges have <1%. If you think, if their graduating class is of ~600, you will have 18 students going to med school, and just 2 students didn’t get in any med school (which I doubt is the college’s fault). It probably doesn’t seem to be much, but 54% of medical school applicants don’t get in any at all. And seriously? MIT and Harvard have their rates of acceptance into med school around 50%.</p>
<p>For someone not committed to the East Coast, Scripps College also offers state of the art science facilities through its Keck Joint Science program (shared with other Claremont colleges) with excellent med school placement rates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not sure where you got that statistic.</p>
<p>ACCEPTANCE RATE<br>
National Acceptance Rate 46%
Total MIT Undergraduate Applicants 82%
-Prehealth Advising Service User* 86%
-Acceptance Rate for 3.0 GPA<strong>or higher 87%
-Acceptance Rate for 3.3 GPA</strong> or higher 95%</p>
<p>I imagine Harvard is similar.</p>
<p>[Preprofessional</a> Stats - MIT
Careers Office](<a href=“http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html]Preprofessional”>http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html)</p>
<p>Medical school admission percentages are very misleading. At many colleges, recommendations are only written for those students advising administrators/ professors deem have a relatively high probability of a successful outcome. Students who have little/no chance of acceptance are encouraged to pursue post grad research, courses, and then reassess their likelihood of a favorable application outcome.</p>
<p>I got in their website. [Preprofessional</a> Stats - MIT Careers Office](<a href=“http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html]Preprofessional”>http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html)</p>
<p>For the record Mount Holyoke graduates the largest number of future female PhD’s in the country, their new science building built in 2003 is impressive, it is Leeds certified, state of the art, and classes cap at approximately 12 students. If you are looking to major in a science Mount Holyoke hands down…!!!</p>
<p>
Is that a good or a bad thing? I would much rather have 20 students in my favorite classes than be shut out of them. </p>
<p>Bryn Mawr has the single most selective post-baccalaureate pre-med program in the country. The undergraduate students have access to the post-bac advising system and enjoy the company of 70+ ambitious med school-bound students without being in direct competition with them. </p>
<p>And just for the record, Bryn Mawr has the highest science PhD productivity rate among all of the women’s colleges. [Bryn</a> Mawr College: Institutional Research](<a href=“http://www.brynmawr.edu/institutionalresearch/phd_productivity.html#Two]Bryn”>http://www.brynmawr.edu/institutionalresearch/phd_productivity.html#Two)</p>
<p>Actually 12 is very desirable… instead of being in a lecture class of 70 or a lab of 20-25 a class of twelve allows for much more personal assistance from the instructors which only teach 2 classes per semester. </p>
<p>And, Barium… I don’t particularly care for your condascending tune… perhaps you should check your facts before correcting people…see below</p>
<p>[Mount</a> Holyoke College :: Science Leadership](<a href=“http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/science.shtml]Mount”>http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/science.shtml)</p>
<p>I did check my facts. I stated that Bryn Mawr’s science productivity *rate<a href=“adjusted%20for%20the%20size%20of%20the%20student%20body”>/i</a> is higher than any other women’s college. Bryn Mawr has also produced a greater number of science PhDs than Mount Holyoke in the last decade, as has Wellesley. Mount Holyoke only comes out on top if you start counting in 1966. Seems that Mount Holyoke has lost some steam since then. </p>
<p>You avoided answering my question about class sizes. How frequently are students shut out of classes in order to keep the class sizes small? Most advanced math and science classes at Bryn Mawr naturally enroll fewer than 12 students, but the popular classes can have up to 40 students. If everyone’s favorite classes were capped at 12 students, most students would never get to take them, which would seem rather unfortunate.</p>
<hr>
<p>Edit: I just checked Mount Holyoke’s schedule of classes and I was relieved to see that most classes were not capped at 12 students. Here are some examples:</p>
<p>Molecular Biology: 130
Protein Biochm & Cell Metabol: 40
Chemical Thermodynamics: 32
Intro to Nano Science & Techn: 20
Advanced Electromagnetic Theory: 25
Operating Systems: 20
Mathematical Finance: 30</p>
<p>Students at Mount Holyoke actually do get to take the classes they want and need to take :)</p>