Can Anyone Give Me a Rundown of the Claremonts??

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Wow, the more things change, the more they stay the same. In the 30 odd years since I attended Pomona College, the descriptions of the 5 Claremont colleges have hardly changed at all.</p>

<p>Back then, Pomona was the traditional "all around" college. Excellent departments in science, languages, music, art, and just about everything else. Lots of pre-meds and pre-laws. The buildings were covered in ivy, the students cheered their losing football team, and every Friday at midnight people went on donut runs to downtown "Clareville."</p>

<p>Scripps was the all girls school, surrounded by a wall, with beautiful buildings and gardens within. They were well known for art, music, and the humanities.</p>

<p>Claremont Men's (that's what it was known as back then, even though they had recently gone coed) was strong in economics, government, and pre-law. They were much more conservative politically than the other colleges.</p>

<p>Harvey Mudd was known for its insanely smart and hard working students. They not only offered math and science excellence on par with Pomona, but offered engineering as well.</p>

<p>Pitzer was originally founded in 1963 as a Teacher's College, but within a decade had become prominent in the behavioral sciences. They had an excellent psychology department and their curriculum was much less traditional than that offered at Pomona or any of the other colleges.</p>

<p>There was a lot of interaction (socially and academically) between the "4 college" students from Pitzer, Mudd, CMC and Scripps, but much less with Pomona. From the Pomona point of view, that was because Pomona pretty much had everything, and there were few reasons to hike 10 blocks up to another college to take a class that was already offered at Pomona. People at the other 4 colleges thought otherwise, and labelled the Pomona students as "snobs" for sticking to themselves.</p>

22

<p>I want to second what lovestoned014 said and add some more. My D is applying to 2 of the 5 and we have visited twice. The ad rep from CMC gave a very concise (and I think pretty unbiased) summary to the 5 C's and I will try to share some of that and also what else we have learned.</p>

<p>You can understand a lot about them from the time of each of their origins.</p>

<p>Pomona was started in 1897 (in Pomona, shortly move to nearby Claremont). It was purposely started to bring to the West Coast a "New England style" LAC. The board were all East Coast elite college grads. Notably, it was co-ed from the start, unlike the East Coast schools. The architecture reflects this inspriation and my D (I didn't go) says it is really beautiful. It has the more academic, ivory tower, intellectual rep, maybe kind of Amherst-like. It is VERY selective as there are a shortage of LACs in California and it is quite small. Thee is a perception that the students are a little snobby toward the other schools but for the most part I think it is a enjoyable rivalry, spurred on by having 2 colleges, Pomona-Pitzer, on one team and the rest on the other. It is a liberal campus but not "out there". </p>

<p>It is noteworthy that, rare among LACs, it is gender balanced (which may mean it is a little easier to get into for a boy than a girl). It also does a pretty good job with racial diversity, especially considering it is out a ways from an urban area. It is a no-loan school with the biggest endowment among the consortium.</p>

<p>Next up is Scripps. Can you guess when it was started? The 1920's, era of suffragettes and flappers; educating women came to the forefront. The Scripps family is very prominent in S Cal, seems like in San Diego everything is names after them. My D says Scripps is a very pretty campus, quieter than the others. It is said to have the best food and the best dorms. It is also very LAC oriented, lot of humanities, but the college is really encouraging science also right now. Although it has a high acceptance rate, it is still rated as most selective. There is a limited pool of women interested in a women's college so they get less applicants. There is a lot of "empowering" and poetry readings going on. They have a very extensive "core" that everyone takes. Some describe it as an "oasis" in the consortium, a great base, peaceful supportive place to come back to. They have had great progress in their fundraising over the recently departed president and now are said to offer good FA, trying to limit loans. It is said they have really improved and moved forward academically over the last 10 years. They value diversity a lot but have had limited success at getting minority students to come there. They tend to give their merit aid to very high SAT scorers only. They have afternoon tea!</p>

<p>Next up was CMC; started as a men's college after WWII, coinciding with what major event? GI Bill! From the beginning, it had a more a more pragmatic approach as befitted it's student population. CMC has also greatly enanched its rep over the last 10 years, now also very hard to get into. They stress leadership, professions, business (although they have no business major). They are almost compulsive in their emphasis on "fit", which was kind of a turn off to me, but not my D. Their endowment has also increased and last year they went to "no loans". They are more politically conservative but only in comparison to other LACs. They are said to have the best parties. Their campus is well kept but not distinctive. They are decently racially diverse. They work with Questbridge (other C's may also). Balanced gender also.</p>

<p>Harvey Mudd is the science school, started in the Sputnik era, in the big push for national achievement in this area. They are about 70% male, mostly white and Asian. They are said to have some special event parties that are very good. The campus is utilitarian looking. I really don't know too much about them!</p>

<p>Pitzer, the one with the rep for being a hippie ultra liberal school, stared, surprise, in the 60'. Social Science emphasis, they just went to "gender neutral" room assignments, which I am sure parents just love :). They have also become more selective recently but are still seen as easier to get into. They are SAT optional. Quirky. Their FA is said not to be as good as they are the newest and have the lowest endowment. They are less balanced gender-wise with 59% female. Pretty good racial diversity.</p>

<p>Hope this helps! My D would very much like to go to one next year. She would like it if it was a little closer to LA but all in all, likes them a lot.</p>

<p>Good luck to all applicants!</p>

23

<p>NealJ2K, check the separate forums offered by CC for each school, and then take the information with a grain of salt. You should have few problems in ascertaining the selectivity and major programs of each college. The reality is that the admission rates have become highly competitive with Pomona and CMC jockeying for the right to the lowest admit rate among all LACs in the country. However, that is only part of the story. You really need to check the faculty at each school and match the classes to your own preferences. </p>

<p>Remember that there is a good amount of interaction between the schools and that the beauty of the consortium remains it offers a better experience than truly separate schools. </p>

<p>You cannot go wrong with any of the schools and none of them is clearly superior to another. Each one is different and so are the students *within *a college!</p>

24

<p>Does anybody know of a student who got in with merit aid? I know they are less generous than, say, Pomona (which is very generous). I'm just trying to get an idea of what they offer.</p>

25

<p>err...dare i ask what gender neutral rooms are...:p</p>

<p>are any solid in biology? [namely pitzer/cmc]</p>

26

<p>^Haha, no, CMC is definitely not spectacular in biology. maybe solid, but def. not strong. After all, it's a business school. It's been a little low on money lately, though, with the economic crisis. They've had to cut some expenses (eliminating Questbridge, for example).</p>

27

<p>I attended the Claremont Colleges and I would not characterize any of the schools elitists. All 5Cs offer highly competitive educations in their areas of strengths, with some of the schools having a degree of sub-culture. All the colleges are tier-1, top 50.</p>

<p>Harvey-Mudd is academically strong with rankings in the top 20. The school is filled with engineer, math & science students, has a lot of concrete infrastructure, brick and science club types. Let’s just say the student have a unicycle club that rides around the 5C</p>

<p>CMC used to be all men, but now coed. Its rankings have improved and is now just shy of the top 10 in liberal arts. These students are perhaps the most conservative of the 5Cs and the school offers a fast track to top MBA schools and Wall Street jobs. The school parties too.</p>

<p>Scripps has sharply improved in academic rankings, esthetically beautiful and has more of a liberal arts curriculum. It is the only all female school. </p>

<p>Pitzer is the youngest school in the consortium and is on a fast track in academic rankings – not a backup any more. The school is being overhauled with new beautify buildings and the student body is diverse. Not just hippies, but a large diverse range of groups that if you have to stereotype, then say liberal academic enthusiasts. Not ‘tree hugers’ like Berkeley. </p>

<p>Pomona is the toped ranked of the consortium that is the most academic, but they have all the fraternities too. The school has stunning ‘old world’ buildings, but also a bit dilapidated in dorms. The academic environment and athletic program is the best of the 5Cs. </p>

<p>In short, academically, you can just choose to pick rankings from US News World Report. But, depending on your interests, all the schools are superb and you should go visit the campuses. Some schools have hit their ranking peak and will keep it. Scripps and Pitzer will likely still improve in rankings and the ‘selectivity’ gaps will erode.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]
are any solid in biology? [namely pitzer/cmc]

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Haha, no, CMC is definitely not spectacular in biology. maybe solid, but def. not strong. After all, it's a business school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First of all, CMC isn't a business school--it's a liberal arts college. Second, the strength of/emphasis on its econ, gov, IR, etc. programs shouldn't bear on the quality of its bio since CMC shares its sciences with Scripps and Pitzer, both of which list bio among their most common majors. </p>

<p>Pitzer and CMC both participate in the Joint Science Department (which, according to the website, is the largest academic department on the 5Cs): Joint</a> Science Department of the Claremont Colleges</p>

<p>There have been other threads re: quality of JSD.</p>

29

<p>Student615 -- agree with your comments.</p>

<p>Although CMC is geographically very near the Claremont Graduate School's Drucker MBA program, they are not the same thing -- I think the poster was trying to use lazy shorthand to say the school is the most pre-professional of the consortium (well, excepting Harvey Mudd, which is fantastic at preparing students for real jobs in engineering, math, the sciences).</p>

<p>I would not argue with the notion that CMC is the most pre-professional.</p>