<p>My D went to a pretty competitive, large public high school in southern California. Large graduating class of 750 or so...about 50 wind up at Berkeley, 25-30 at UCLA, a lot to other UC's, Cal-States, a smattering at HYPSM but other than HYPSM going "back East" is rare. One of D's best friends is at U/Chicago and we hadn't sent anyone there for a while, I don't think. Even the local top LAC such as Occidental, Scripps, and the other Claremont Colleges aren't all <em>that</em> well known relative to their quality.</p>
<p>Reactions to D going to Smith varied. There were the cognoscenti who were approving and impressed. There was about an equivalent number whose response was, "Aren't there a lot of L-word there?", to the point where I thought of printing up a card that said, "1. We know. 2. She's not. 3. It's not a problem." And then a much larger segment, among both students and parents, that said "Where?" When it became known that Smith was a women's college, the reaction was as if this were something exotic or archaic, with the question--sometimes spoken, sometimes stillborn on the tips of their tongues--"Why would she want to do that?"</p>
<p>MWFN: note that those calling the womens colleges "overrated" are most usually of the male persuasion. As noted in my comments above, I think LAC's in general receive shorter shrift. Or the girls there wear shorter shifts. Or something. Fwiw, TheMom is a director-level employee at UCLA and received some oblique (or maybe not so oblique, for all I know) comments and queries on D not applying to UCLA or Cal, where--contrary to some assumptions--she would have been as close to a slam-dunk as possible in these days and most likely would have been a strong contender for a Regents Scholarship. (I try not to think about the last...that really <em>would</em> have opened up a price gap between UC and Smith w/financial aid.)</p>
<p>The reactions that we received were twofold: 1. Smith? Where is Smith? to...2. Smith, oh my gawd, that is such a great school! She must be very bright?<br>
We believe in the latter. It is amazing how many people didn't recognize the name or caliber of this college; and I'm including some of my D's high school teachers and even a guidance counselor. Granted, she is the only graduate of her high school to attend Smith, but geez...come on! Come to think of it, this is similar to the response she gets from UMass men compared to Amherst men. <em>lol</em></p>
<p>"These schools all seem to be much more prominent nationally than other LACs, at least in my experience."</p>
<p>With older generations, this is true since these colleges used to be the Female Ivies. Since the brightest women couldn't go to Harvard or Yale or any of the others, they went to one of the Seven Sisters. Once the Ivies went co-ed, the respect for the women's colleges declined. You can tell that by the USNWR rankings which use peer assessments as one of their measures. If peer institutions thought of the Seven (now Five) Sisters as highly as they once did, I think the single gender rankings would be higher. Coupled with the high admittance rates and the historically lower SAT scores for women (which often don't jive with their grades and other measures of performance), these schools probably find it difficult to maintain, let alone improve, their rankings despite the high quality education they offer.</p>
<p>I really hate the way USNWR has changed the way colleges approach admissions and policy decisions. University presidents find themselves criticized when the school slips in the rankings even though nothing has changed. I've heard several university presidents express dismay at the influence of USNWR even as they admitted that they couldn't afford to ignore it.</p>
<p>I've actually heard a <em>professor</em> ask a university president why she was pursing an initiative if that policy wasn't a factor in the rankings. Now that's going crazy.</p>
<p>Hmmm, this is all really quite interesting to me! </p>
<p>I remember hearing a classmate of mine in grad school (Wellesley alum) griping that she used to get so mad when people would say "Oh, right, you go there to get your Mrs. degree" or something to that effect. It was rather sexist and some folks chuckled (real nice, right?) but all I remember thinking was "Funny, didn't Hilary Clinton go there? Not a bad alumni to be associated with!" I guess having grown up on the East Coast I heard more about these institutions, but I'm still a bit surprised to read TheDad's comment that folks in SoCal didn't know too much about Smith. Many Californians do seem to be rather content with the UCs, though, so I guess it's not that surprising to hear that not a lot of students from his D's high school were going elsewhere, or at least to the "other coast" lol. It sure is tough to get a Cali student to attend a private school when they can go to Berkeley, LA, SD, or one of the other UCs for so cheap!</p>
<p>I have a friend who attended Wabash in Indiana (all male, though I'm sure you know that :))- I wonder if he's experienced any similar reactions? </p>
<p>To clarify, quite a few folks know about Smith. But they tend to have some markers such as being educated at a top school themselves, being older (one no longer hears of the Seven Sisters as a group), or have some sort of roots on the East Coast. A USC professor who owns a unit in our building is married to a Smithie, etc. But there's a certain educational and even class marker that sorts for knowledge of Smith in particular and even LAC's in general.</p>
<p>There's a depressing thread in the Wellesley forum about how prestigious are the Seven Sisters. Prestige whoring in general makes me nuts and letting what your friends and relatives think of a college (or not) influencing where you, the student, who has a lot more information about it, ultimately goes makes me roll my eyes in disgust.</p>
<p>I'll be honest -- the general consensus with girls (at my school) about women's colleges is something along the lines of "OMG! But there aren't any boys! Why would you go there?" I have to admit, being completely ignorant and flat-out dumb of the potential girls get at women's colleges, I had the same reaction when my friend said E she wanted to go to Wellesley. But then I grew to it after one of my best friends V said she was applying. Without V, I probably would have never found out about the amazing possibilities at Smith.</p>
<p>While other people would disagree, I would honestly say that the no-guys factor is probably the #1 reason why more girls don't apply. #2 would probably be the so-called "lack of prestige." But if Smith was co-ed, it would probably have a 25-30% acceptance rate...and I think I'm being generous with those percentages. Ditto with many other women's colleges.</p>
<p>P.S. If I were nothing more than an innocent bystander reading all of this, AdOfficer would have pretty much turned me from Smith. That may sound harsh, but I don't disagree that ANY admissions officer has weight over parents' advice, no matter how excellent the parents' advice is -- for obvious reasons. If a Smith admissions officer told me to eat a scorpion to get a free-ride to Smith and a parent told me not to do it, well...you get the point. (A bit more exaggerated than I'd intended... No "Fear Factor" training for me...)</p>
<p>Haha... prestige whoring. I have to admit it, it's a popular reason to choose a school because it's useful in its own way (bragging to family, what have you). It's pointless, in my opinion. But it comes in handy. That's all I can really say about it. If I get into Smith and tell my relatives across the waters, they'll have no idea but I won't care. Eh, in truth, I don't know where my cousins go to college and I only know the really BIG, important ones, so it seems like a fair tradeoff. :)</p>
<p>Although where I'm from, it's the REALLY BIG schools that <em>guarantee</em> some kind of comfortable means, whereas the smaller, lesser known schools are basically looked down upon. Not unlike here (not the former but the latter)...but to an insane degree...</p>
<p>Someday, Smith is going to very well-known. Too bad it doesn't get enough PR. That would help. And more people like TD, RLT, mini, and MWFN... more people to "advertise" the school.</p>
<p>In the meantime, a slightly larger percentage rate only gives me a slightly better chance of entry, so Im not really complaining. There are pros and cons to all types of percentages.</p>
<p>OK -- enough forum-ing. Need to take history notes!!</p>
<p>On the Smith-only supplement to the COHFE questionnaire that I just received, the ask a back-door question about prestige, asking to what the selection of college was influenced by ratings such as USNWR's.</p>
<p>TtFN, I don't want to downplay the "no guys" factor being a pain for many, though, to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, I still like the quote that the guys are there when you want 'em, out of your hair when you don't...though I don't think it's quite that easy in reality. </p>
<p>D didn't seriously consider Smith until meeting a group of Smithies...and then it was "Wow...who are these guys?" The first visit to Smith iced it. And don't forget you have year-abroad & internship possibilities for meeting those of the male lifestyle.</p>
<p>Well, if my friend gets into Amherst or Hampshire, then I'll probably go over there on weekends for fun or take a course. The no-guys factor has its cons but I think it's one of those situation that, most importantly, I personally CAN deal with. My school's not exactly known for producing perfect specimens of the male species (they're rare and usually taken), so in a way, I'm <em>kind of</em> used to it. "Kind of" being key...</p>
<p>If BOYS were #1 on my list, I'd apply somewhere else. I hear Purdue has a nice supply of 'em (well, that's what others claim). Smith is intellectually inclined. That's more than enough for me.</p>
<p>AHH, I hate waiting for the acceptance/rejection letter. It's killing me!!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Someday, Smith is going to very well-known. Too bad it doesn't get enough PR. That would help. And more people like TD, RLT, mini, and MWFN... more people to "advertise" the school.
<p>"And don't forget you have year-abroad & internship possibilities for meeting those of the male lifestyle."</p>
<p>Now I'm the zealot! While internships and college exchange/college abroad programs are a wonderful "selling point" about Smith and other women's colleges, there are more opportunities than one might think for meeting males while at Smith or Mount Holyoke. There are 5-college musical groups, religious groups and other special interest groups (political, athletic etc.) Males actually come to the campuses for lectures, musical performances etc. There are many Smith and Mount Holyoke women who have met their male life partners at a 5 college campus.</p>
<p>Bryn Mawr and Wellesley have similar opportunities.</p>
<p>"But there's a certain educational and even class marker that sorts for knowledge of Smith in particular and even LAC's in general."</p>
<p>This is the nub of it, right here. I get the "Your daughter must be really, really smart if she's at Smith" from those who went to elite schools and/or who are upper middle to upper class. The irony of it does not escape me, since Smith now has the highest number (or is it percentage?) of Pell Grants in the LACs. Although this socially-conscious decision to offer a first-rate education to women of lower income backgrounds should be lauded, it is yet another factor in pushing Smith down in the rankings. You cannot expect women from disadvantaged backgrounds to have the same kind of stats you expect from those coming from privileged ones.</p>
[/quote]
Ah ha! BJM...found one! And it's like one of those British mysteries where the person reporting a crime turns out to be the criminal. Verrrrry sneaky.</p>
<p>2b, I happen to agree with you about the opportunities for Smithies to meet guys but it's enough of a complaint that I don't want to oversell or whitewash the issue. I suspect my D travels less than many to the other campuses, which may color my perceptions. She protects Friday nights for recreation, almost religiously, but Saturdays and Sundays are often consumed with school work, not partying.</p>
<p>MWFN, I think that the diversity is good for Smith, even at the expense of test scores. (Need to be careful...Mini has all the data about test scores and economic background.) When you account for the economic disparity, Smith does just fine and it doesn't mean the students are any less capable or less smart as a group than their higher scoring but less diverse sisters at another school. The problem isn't with the rankings, it's with the understanding of them.</p>
<p>And as for how well Smith is known, I suspect that if it continues in the direction that it's currently going, it will become more broadly known, pushing some of the current class/income boundaries that I perceive.</p>
<p>It's funny...I actually knew about Smith & Wellesley as a child and had to re-calibrate my image of white-gloves-and-pearls when D started looking. Of course, meeting a couple of dozen current Smithies pretty much shattered that image anyway, LOL.</p>
<p>"It's funny...I actually knew about Smith & Wellesley as a child and had to re-calibrate my image of white-gloves-and-pearls when D started looking. Of course, meeting a couple of dozen current Smithies pretty much shattered that image anyway, LOL."</p>
<p>It was fine school even back when. I used to date Smithies back in the Dark Ages (1967-1971), and my first love lived in Chapin. But it WAS different, not so much in the academics, as in the aspirations of SOME of the women who attended, and what the college did to feed those aspirations. Now mind you - it has always been an "uppity" place. It's just that the meaning of "uppity" has changed.</p>
<p>Before she left, Ruth Simmons convened a taskforce of professors, administrators, and admissions folks to answer two questions: 1) whether SAT scores of attending students were predictive of educational success at Smith; and 2) whether the use of SAT scores in admissions worked against Smith's historic commitment to economic diversity. The answers that came back were unequivocally "no" and "yes", and admissions were then instructed to de-emphasize use of SAT scores. One (lower-ranked) admissions person told me that they keep them mainly to ensure that they believe applicants can actually do the work, and for use in their few "merit" awards (which, by definition, has them competing with other schools that use 'em.)</p>
<p>Mom...well it's interesting that you mention Smith's Pell numbers, because some of us in admissions are lobbying for USNWR to consider this and socioeconomic diversity of student body in their rankings :)...actually, I'd love to lobby for USNWR to stop ranking (yes, you heard it first, here on the Smith thread) because I am really not a big fan of the "prestige-whoring" (if my mother heard me using that word...). In truth, prestige does matter...it certainly helped me get my feet in many doors in the careers I've had...however, I continue to believe I was really lucky because I didn't care about it - I actually knew the college I went to was the perfect fit for me, regardless of its prestige. However, there are so many students on CC who <em>only</em> seem to care about prestige and this really worries me - and I think USNWR is one of the biggest reasons why prestige-whoring continues to perpetuate. We ask on our application how the applicant got interested in our school, and the number of kids who indicate "ranking" who wind up being an obvious non-fit for us is amazing. I'm not one to simply try and "sell" my institution...on the contrary, if I meet a student on the road and feel that their needs may be better served at another institution, I suggest they investigate that school (one of the reasons why I read your posts in these institution-specific threads!); also, I volunteer at a community college center as a counselor and it's important for me to know about as many colleges as possible for my students...it is disheartening to see that so many kids are <em>really</em> concerned about the rankings, yet they don't know how to interpret them or what they are actually ranking...what's the point of going to a highly-ranked school if it isn't the right place for you!?</p>