Carleton v. Williams

<p>I’m coming to this thread late. Presumably the OP has made a decision. But for posterity, and as a person who has seen both campuses, I’ll try to post some value-adding comments regarding differences.</p>

<p>-- I completely agree that the major LAC’s are very much alike, but there are some outliers. It would, for example, be a mistake to expect that Washington & Lee will be very much like Reed. Some research is necessary.</p>

<p>-- Williamstown colder than Northfield? Uhhh, nooo… I’ve seen this claim before made about several New England schools (Middlebury, Bates, etc.). Easy research shows that southern MN has both colder winters and warmer summers. Continental climate, you know. Just be glad Carleton is in Northfield and not Warroad.</p>

<p>-- It has already been observed that Carleton students are more apt to earn Ph.D.'s and Williams students more apt to earn LL.D’s, M.D.'s, etc. This can be statistically verified but IMO the subtle preference for idea over applicaton at Carleton can be sensed when comparing visits to the two schools. Couple this with the strong sports sub-culture at Williams, much weaker if not absent at Carleton, and I think you have the greatest difference in “vibe” between the two student bodies.</p>

<p>-- Carleton is by no means under-resourced but I did get the unmistakeable impression that Williams’s comparatively huge endowment does entail that it can deliver more services to its students (for example, the optional tutorials it offers in its curriculum). This is not a trivial factor to consider when choosing between the schools.</p>

<p>-- One other difference: Northfield, while hardly urban, is a larger and more self-sufficient town than Williamstown. One is more likely to find what one needs nearby. But the farmland surrounding Northfield is quite different from the Berkshires, too.</p>

<p>D was significantly disappointed in Williams’s library. They are starting construction on a new one but it will not be finished until 2017, too late for her. She really like the library at Carleton.
Williams has the quintessential New England, Harvardesque, campus vibe. Carleton has the classic mid western friendly feel. Really very distinct choices that will each draw in a way that continues to propigate those differences.
She did like Williams’s seminar/tutorial approach. And, who dosn’t love purple cows?
She’s an athlete who did not want a predominantly athletic vibe or sense of priority and Williams does have a strong athletic culture.
Both awesome schools that won’t hurt anyone’s graduate school options.</p>

<p>mflevity: could throw various arguments at you, and I wont. Closing point: I stand by my statement that Carleton students are less intelligent than I expected. I don’t know what humility you want me to exhibit: there are certainly smart people here, and many, many people here that are smarter than I am, but have you been in a 100 level intro class recently? Jee. Sus. Some of the things people do/say really indicate that either they have put zero effort into learning any of the course material, or they simply cannot grasp it. I by no means think that this is a phenomenon that is unique to Carleton; I have heard similar complaints from many of my high school friends who went to different colleges (about fellow students who are not capable academically). The average Carleton student IS intelligent and hardworking; the average Carleton student is NOT brilliant. And a surprisingly high percentage of Carleton students are fairly inept academically. That is all.</p>

<p>Coming late too. I object to the characterization of Williams students as main stream jocks. Williams has a significant presence of the arts: a semi-professional orchestra, a world class art museum and professional theater space that offers summer theater workshops. It also hosts a yearly professional film festival during the school year.</p>

<p>Do these things make a difference? Anecdotal case in point: my S entered Williams as a potential Classics Major, majored in Classics, but is now I. A graduate Art History Program. Art History wasn’t even on the map for him, but he found himself attracted to the exhibits at the Clark Museum. He took only the two intro Art History courses, but on the strength of Williams’ reputation has been admitted to an academically strong program. He is one of the most intellectual people I have ever met. He can do problem sets that prove the theory of relativity, read the Aeneid in Latin, recite the complete text if a few Shakespeare plays and discourse on the relationship of Turner to the industrial revolution. He loved Williams.</p>

<p>I am not saying that any of this wouldn’t be true at Carleton. Probably is. I am merely describing what I know of Williams.</p>

<p>Drought, I am sad for you and your poor experience thus far at Carleton. As someone who has left the Carleton bubble (if not the academic bubbble), I have a few thoughts for you.</p>

<p>I would certainly agree that people are not uniformly geniuses at everything they do at Carleton. I was a TA for some of those 100 level science classes. I’m sure I was just as much of a mess in my 100 level classics distros - humanities is my weak point, and I would be the first to admit it. (I’m sure my profs would have been the second to admit it - sorry I was such a pain Chico!)</p>

<p>That being said, I think if you expect things to have been magically different had you gotten into Williams and gone there instead, you are setting yourself up for disappointment. I have now done research or gone to grad school with folks from a respectable swath of the top tier liberal arts schools in the country (Amherst, Wesleyan, Smith, Pomona, Whitman, Colorado College, Grinnell, etc.). As I mentioned before, I have found this group to have many more similarities than differences, in terms of intelligence, engagement, and willingness to put themselves out there and try new things.</p>

<p>I guess my point is, don’t waste your years at Carleton pining away for what might have been at Williams. Would it have been a great school for you? Quite possibly. On the other hand, you will rarely come across another environment where people are as bright and eager to learn as the one you are in right now. If Carleton doesn’t reach your standard, you will be in for an uncomfortable surprise when you hit the real world (or heck, even grad school).</p>

<p>Drought, my point was that the non-experiential arguments you provided as to the intellectual inferiority of Carleton students were weak. By all means describe your personal experience here, but don’t point to things like test scores and acceptance rates as though a disparity is obvious.</p>

<p>I agree with musicguru5 on everything in the previous post.</p>

<p>

mythmom, such a characterization would indeed be absurd, but I believe this is severely overstating what was said. I said that, when compared to Carleton, Williams had a strong sports subculture, not a “mainstream” one. neDad suggested that Williams had a “strong athletic culture” and his daughter found a “predominantly athletic vibe”, which I think should be read that he was simply stating that she found it to be too much for her tastes.</p>

<p>I’ll stand by my admittedly subjective appraisal, an observation which I neither condemn nor praise, but will add that Williams’ most recent Director’s Cup trophy, awarded each year to the school with the best all-around success in intercollegiate sports, is prominently displayed in their Admissions Office. Carleton has no such claim to fame and I don’t think they aspire to it.</p>

<p>"They chose to go to a school in the Midwest rather than a bigger-name school on a coast, knowing they’ll get a great education even if they don’t get the reflected glory of a bigger name. "</p>

<p>Carleton is a bigger name school in the midwest. Pomona is a bigger name school in the west. Williams is a bigger name school in the east. Since it’s all regional, one cannot conclude that any of those schools are overall “bigger names.”</p>

<p>Correction to Northeastern Dad: Williams’ brand new, insanely nice library will be open for fall of 2014 (you may be thinking of Amherst’s massive new science complex, which is slated to open in 2017). That means that students entering this year will get two full years with the new library, and anyone entering after this fall will have the new library for all or most of their time at Williams:</p>

<p>[Project</a> Timeline | New Sawyer Library](<a href=“http://newsawyerlibrary.williams.edu/project-timeline/]Project”>http://newsawyerlibrary.williams.edu/project-timeline/)</p>

<p>The facilities at Williams are almost uniformly among the very best of all the liberal arts colleges (certainly its student life facilities, science facilities, dorms, theater, and humanities facilities, and in two years the main library, all of which have been newly built or gut renovated within the past dozen years). The one exception, ironically given the discussion in this thread, are the athletics facilities, which are just so-so overall (with some high points like basketball and squash), and in some cases (the field house, the football complex, the fitness center) badly in need of major improvements.</p>

<p>This year was Carleton’s most selective in its history. It had the most applicants, the lowest acceptance rate, and the highest grades and test scores of entering students ever. This is while the number of applicants remained steady or fell at other top institutions (don’t know if this includes Williams). This certainly should speak to the high caliber of the institution you are attending PolarBearVsShark, and by no means is Williams in a higher tier than Carleton. [The</a> Carletonian: 2012 Spring Issue 6](<a href=“The Carletonian”>The Carletonian)</p>

<p>@Clevelandude, I agree with you. Williams is by no means in a higher tier than Carleton. In fact, in certain aspects, Carleton even outshines all other liberal arts colleges by a mile. </p>

<p>For an instance, Carleton is ranked #1 for undergraduate teaching in a national liberal arts college. This implies that Carleton has a history of very strong commitment to undergraduate teaching, and therefore provides one of the best quality education of any liberal arts college in the country. </p>

<p>[Best</a> Undergraduate Teaching | Rankings | Top National Liberal Arts Colleges | US News](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges/undergraduate-teaching]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges/undergraduate-teaching)</p>

<p>Also, Carleton is ranked #2 (only after Princeton University) among Alumni’s most loved college or university. This also goes to show that the graduates of Carleton absolutely loved their school and had one of best times of their life at Carleton. This, in my opinion, is one of the best aspects of Carleton. For many students, Carleton is not just a school that they go to get a degree, but it’s like a second home to them. Carls just love Carleton.</p>

<p>[Alumni’s</a> Top 10 Most Loved Schools - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/15/alumnis-top-10-most-loved-schools]Alumni’s”>http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/15/alumnis-top-10-most-loved-schools)</p>

<p>And, as Clevelandude said, Carleton had the lowest acceptance rate this year. But, I am sure that this rate will fall even more from next year because Carleton also recently joined the QuestBridge program.</p>

<p>In a nutshell, Carleton, in it’s own way, is as good as (if not better than) any other LAC in the country (and that includes Williams too).</p>

<p>This is a great conversation to read. :)</p>

<p>Historically, I always got the sense that Williams was the better school than Carleton, but lately I do think Carleton is getting much closer in caliber. It is great to see Carleton students and Alumni argue that they are just as good if not better than Williams. 10 or 15 years ago I don’t think I would have seen this. When I was at Carleton, I remember hearing stories from my classmates about how bummed they were about a rejection from Amherst or Williams. Carleton was my top choice, so these stores ****ed me off for the most part.</p>

<p>I’m also very suspicious of the class rank part of this. I think I read in this thread that only 1/4 of Williams student’s High Schools report class rank. I assume that this just means Williams students went to Prep schools out east that don’t report class rank. There is nothing wrong with this. I just doesn’t mean that Williams’ students are smarter. Richer perhaps…</p>

<p>Once you get in into the top 20…50…150+ LACs…does it really matter? You’re going to get a heck of a good education that’s slathered with plenty of attention from instructors, staff, et al. As has been said many times–it’s a matter of fit. Where does it feel more natural for you? If any of my two remaining children were to get into one of these schools, it’s “game over” ~ they’ve made it. (My oldest just recently completed freshman yr @ Swat.) They’ll have a wonderful opportunity to pursue their passions and have many many options on how they want to live out their lives.</p>

<p>Many of unexpected things happen in college. I know I’m a bit of a mystic, but kids are drawn to their futures, and sometimes adcoms and colleges help out.</p>

<p>S was drawn to Williams for reasons he could never articulate. However, the Clark Museum, a world class museum, was right next door to his dorm one year. He spent so much time going to exhibits that a light bulb went off in his head. Even though he discovered his passion only his senior year, he is now on his way to a life as an art historian and has been accepted into a grad program for September. He had no idea art history was in his future, but Williams happens to be THE LAC for art history, and he did take the two intro courses there.</p>

<p>I’m sure similar serendipitous things happen at Swat (congratulations to the above poster), Carleton, Amherst, Grinnell, Barnard, Smith…etc, etc, etc.</p>

<p>Not everything can be weighed, measured, or graphed. Some outcomes are mysterious, but all these schools provide opportunities for wonderful discoveries.</p>

<p>Since LAC’s are beleaguered and fewer and fewer students get liberal arts degrees, we should think of them as allies, not adversaries.</p>

<p>…mythmom. We’re fortunate to have so MANY great schools in this country. We need to support them more. Don’t know how these schools can keep up with the escalating costs. But that’s for a different post…</p>

<p>I would have to disagree strongly with omm64. The truth is that the schools with the help of the FA/gov’t loan programs are on a completely unsustainable path. Mythmom talks about her son wanting to become an historian. Personally I think that is great but realistically does it make economic sense to spend 250k on a nearly non-marketable degree? Just how many tenured historian positions exist in the United States? Now her son is obviously bright and for him it might work out but even then only if he is lucky enough to graduate with minimal debt. The crisis has already engulfed the laws schools and it will quickly spread everywhere. The student debt crisis will make the housing bubble look insignificant and unlike a house you can’t foreclose or walk away from student debt.</p>

<p>We’re getting off-topic (Carleton v. Williams, remember?), and I think mythmom and her son should be trusted to know what’s best for his education without receiving an unsolicited critique from a stranger.</p>

<p>Mflevity, agreed ~ the sky is NOT falling! Pursue your dreams~& don’t shy away from what may be perceived as the ‘esoteric.’ My siblings & I were first generation college graduates: I studied theology @ a well regarded Eastern Div School; Sis attended what some might consider a West Coast “Hippie” College; Brother (& his wife) graduated from a Northwest Art Institute–& we were the products of a ship yard worker & stay @ home mom. Parents gave us one important credo~go after your dreams, no matter how “impractical.” </p>

<p>Back to the original topic…</p>

<p>It may be off topic but 0064 you are dramatically wrong. This clip pertains to law school but is exactly the same for all soft science degrees unless the parents are rich or the student is getting nearly full FA.</p>

<p>[TaxProf</a> Blog: Bloomberg: Law Grads Are Now ‘Indentured Servants’ to the U.S Government](<a href=“TaxProf Blog”>http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2012/06/bloomberg-law-.html)</p>

<p>SAY: It doesn’t matter. Not everyone can do math/hard science, and if they could, there wouldn’t be jobs for everyone anyway. Maybe your pessimism is well-founded, but there is nothing to do about right now.</p>

<p>And I always felt I’d rather have a PhD (it happens to be in a Humanities field) and have a job I hated, then just have the job I hated. As it happens, I do like teaching at the college level and did find a job.</p>

<p>It’s not smart to go into debt for a humanities PhD, but most pay students a tight but sustaining wage and waive tuition, so it’s like having a low paying job you love. If at the end, no job materializes, you haven’t lost anything but have spent your four years happily fulfilling a dearly held ambition.</p>

<p>What is it to you anyway? Why are you intent on making this point here? You are not the only one with a brain who sees what’s happening in our society. People choose to respond to it, differently.</p>

<p>My parents were beside themselves that I got a PhD instead of attend law school, but since it wasn’t their dime, I made my own choice. I’m pretty sure I couldn’t have juggled a law practice with raising my children, but I’ve been employed as a college professor for 30 years and plan to go another 10.</p>

<p>All studies show that in 2020 there will be many job openings in higher ed because my generation will be retiring. Schools may do away with tenured faculty and people may float around in one year positions, but I am sure there will be some jobs to be had. If not, see point A.</p>