Do these schools make sense to you?

Parents Forum
61

<p>

</p>

<p>Wrong. At need-blind schools, students are admitted without regard to whether or how much financial aid a student will need to enroll. And even at schools that that practice need-aware admissions, the policy typically affects only a very small percentage of students; between 5% and 15% of the applicants who are at the bottom of the acceptable range of applicants. </p>

<p>Pizzagirl: Colgate has a gorgeous campus and fine academics, but the dominant culture is quite preppy, with a strong Greek system and a robust drinking culture. Based on what you’ve posted, it doesn’t sound like your D’s cup of tea. It’s really important to evaluate the predominant campus culture when you’re considering LACs.</p>

62

<p>Mattmom: Barnard is more difficult to get into than Barnard. Wellesley’s SAT’s are slightly higher, but Barnard’s GPA is, and takes under 30% whereas Wellesley is closer to 40%.</p>

<p>I am slightly defensive here, I know, because on many threads Smithies and Wellesleyites imply that Barnard is somehow lesser.</p>

<p>I wouldn’t say that Barnard is better, however, I think the academics at all five schools are sterling, and all have national reputations.</p>

<p>Barnard suffers a bit with its endowment (where Wellesley excels) because Barnard shares many facilities with Columbia that don’t get counted as Barnard facilities but actually are. No matter. Wellesley obviously has deeper pockets.</p>

<p>Barnard also suffers a little with its graduation rate because NYC entices some of the women into acting/modeling careers and various avenues that don’t require degrees.</p>

<p>Wellesley has had very illustrious alumnae (H Clinton a great example – produces secretaries of state, yes? M. Albright) but Barnard has too – Judith Kaye head of NYS Court of appeals considered for the Supreme Court (but turned it down) is a Barnard grad.</p>

<p>That said, Mt. Holyoke, Smith and Bryn Mawr have extremely impressive grads too.</p>

<p>I don’t like to parse hairs among these five schools, firmly believing that sisters should stand together.</p>

<p>I, did, however, want to correct a misconception.</p>

<p>Bryn Mawr make be marginally easier to get into, but its academic reputation is not tarnished by that in the least.</p>

<p>I think among these five schools it’s definitely a matter of preference.</p>

<p>My D’s second choice was Mt. Holyoke. She just didn’t warm to Smith (which I didn’t understand because I loved it.)</p>

63

<p>:-) I would never imply that Barnard is lesser. It was my second choice after Smith. </p>

<p>Re Sweet Briar: I honestly think it would be selling your daughter short, unless her life plans include being a serious semi-profesisonal horse showwoman and/or hosting Derby Day parties. She’s qualified for a much better women’s college in terms of overall educational quality, rank, and location. Really. Plus, I find their “taps club” system to be really weird, like automatically dividing the campus into cliques of people in a club and people not (and the clubs have their own sort of rankings within them). I don’t know, it’s all a little too bizarre. Also, on a superficial note, who makes their college website pink and green like a Victoria Secret pajama store? Sweet Briar. That’s who. </p>

<p>In terms of what’s easier to get into, whoever said it’s easier to get into Vassar or Sarah Lawrence than any of the seven sisters other than Wellesley is incorrect. In fact, if you think the top seven sisters might be too reachy, maybe your D should think about Vassar or Sarah Lawrence. Really good schools, within her range.</p>

64

<p>Another nerdy/nurturing/freethinking Midwestern LAC that I don’t think has been mentioned yet is Earlham. And how about Oberlin? Too far out there? </p>

<p>I second the recommendations to look at Grinnell and Beloit. Beloit has a minor in art and museum studies and a student-run art gallery in downtown Beloit. A friend’s daughter has been absolutely thrilled there. </p>

<p>Re schools named for the small cities they’re located in: That hasn’t seemed to stigmatize Princeton too much. ;)</p>

65

<p>Your D is almost a twin of mine. I’d say she’s got a great shot at L & C (which by the way offers early action). </p>

<p>Macalester, to my way of thinking, has many advantages over Carleton including being easier to get into.</p>

<p>In terms of West Coast more safetyish: I second Pitzer. D also has several friends who are very happy at Occidental and University of Redlands.</p>

66

<p>just received a newsletter from Mount Holyoke (daughter just graduated). they have a new program called Nexus which involves a summer internship which can be served in a wide number of areas - their version of tying the liberal arts to to the vocational. check out their website mtholyoke.edu</p>

67

<p>another thought. I went to Barnard for my A.B. and I though it was difficult to live the life of the mind in NYC. Mount Holyoke, Smith, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr are all quieter places to learn at. Just visited Connecticut College a few weeks ago and was very impressed. New London isn’t much but Conn offers instruction in 12 foreign languages for 1800 students.</p>

68

<p>Must admit I never even thought of Barnard in terms of the OP’s daughter because as great a school as it is for some students, as a relative local who used to spend a lot of time in the neighborhood I just don’t think of it as cozy in terms of setting. Exciting, varied, great view of the Hudson, lots of good things about Morningside Heights but not sure it seemed like the kind of feel the OP’s daughter seemed to be looking for. </p>

<p>I also continue to believe that the women’s colleges have experienced at least a little falloff–maybe less so now than five or ten years ago–in numbers of the kind of top applicants who would normally (decades ago) have been theirs automatically. Remember, women who are now over 60 didn’t have the option of going to Princeton–or Bowdoin, or Williams, or Yale, to name just a few. Judith Kaye and Hillary Clinton and other women of their approximate age were not eligible for undergraduate admission to what were then elite men’s schools. For Harvard you had Radcliffe, for Brown you had Pembroke (does anyone remember that?), and of course there were other great options. But I suspect that at least some of the older illustrious alumna of the women’s colleges might not be alumna if they had had the same opportunities that their daughters (figuratively speaking) now have. That’s not to say they’re not wonderful school that offer great educations, but I would still maintain that a highly qualified female high school student who would be a tough sell at Williams or Amherst or Dartmouth, say, would have a much better shot at any of the remaining single-sex Sisters. Certainly the specific instances I’ve observed over the past ten or twelve years suggest that to be the case, though of course anecdotal evidence doesn’t provide a full picture.</p>

69

<p>

</p>

<p>Thank you for the Earlham mentions. I am a big fan of Oberlin and have been for years, but is it too reachy for her and/or is being from Chicagoland a minus? (sincerely asking, I don’t know)</p>

<p>qialah, she already has a twin, she doesn’t need another :-)</p>

<p>wjb - Fair point re Princeton!</p>

70

<p>Women’s colleges are experiences a sudden and dramatic resurgence because East Coast female humanities majors are often shut out of other schools who want geographical diversity and gender parity.</p>

<p>D was rejected from many schools that boys with much lesser stats and accomplishments were admitted too.</p>

<p>Many, many applicants to women’s colleges are 2100+ SAT’s and Barnard, at least, has a higher average GPA than Columbia. My D’s second choice was Brown (Mt. Holyoke among women’s colleges.)</p>

<p>Smithiebutproud: I know you are a fairer person that that and have no axe to grind. I honestly didn’t mean you, and I love Smith. When we visited my personal dream was either to take an engineering degree there (I have a PhD in English) or teach there.</p>

<p>As for Barnard being cozy, D thought it was. I can see why others would think differently.</p>

<p>As for the life of the mind, Another NJ Mom, I see your point, and I certainly can’t quibble with your personal experience. D felt NYC IS the life of the mind. She certainly got a HIGHLY academic education at Barnard, moreso than S’s at Williams.</p>

<p>I have been SHOCKED to find that Barnard was more intellectual, Williams more creative. Going in I would have thought the opposite.</p>

<p>This is not to choose one over the other. Williams is innovative and interdisciplinary. Barnard has been more of the kind of academic intellectualism associating with Chicago. I did find this unexpected.</p>

<p>However, like everyone else here, I would be happy if the OP’s daughter were happily situated wherever it was.</p>

<p>Barnard is certainly NOT the school for everyone. For example, D’s sophomore dorm ad mice. Yuck!!</p>

71

<p>Oberlin is not an easy admit, but it’s certainly not out of the question. Average GPA of entering freshmen last year was 3.6, mid-50% ACT range was 27-32. I think being from metropolitan Chicago neither helps nor hurts. Lotsa nonconformists at Oberlin. Again, I’m thinking your D needs to check out the culture and see if it suits her. I know I sound like a broken record on this point, but our family learned it the hard way: My D started out at a LAC that turned out to be a poor cultural fit. It is an enormously important factor at small schools. Each has a distinctive personality.</p>

72

<p>

</p>

<p>Funny you should say that. My D (raised by two Chicago alumni) has Barnard at the top of her list for precisely that intellectual feeling (Chicago is much lower down due to lousy location). She also liked Smith because it “felt” intellectual to her. Bryn Mawr, she thought did not stress the women’s college aspect enough. She is also applying to Agnes Scott in Decatur GA (another women’s school), It is a safety on paper, but D really loved it and it is close to the top of her list. Sweet Briar was deemed “too horsey” (and she hated their colors LOL).</p>

73

<p>“Mattmom: Barnard is more difficult to get into than Barnard.”</p>

<p>Hmm, then maybe OP should include Barnard as a high match, and Barnard as a reach?</p>

<p>"I just don’t think of it as cozy in terms of setting. Exciting, varied, great view of the Hudson, lots of good things about Morningside Heights but not sure it seemed like the kind of feel the OP’s daughter seemed to be looking for. "</p>

<p>Good point here is, for some at least, city glitters yet experience as college student in it may not be gold, as it turns out. In part, because much gold is required to make it glitter. Keep that in mind as you consider all city schools.
Some schools may use presence of the city as a crutch/excuse to offer comparatively little campus life on their own. Is there life on campus? Anything whatsoever to do on campus on a weekend night , besides go downtown to bars (which can get old fast)? Not singling out Barnard here, necessarily, it should be a concern with all of them. Re: Barnard, view of the Hudson I saw wasn’t that great, actually.</p>

74

<p>You know, pg, I’m thinking, why don’t you and your D do a Midwestern road trip to start? Visit some combination of Grinnell, Beloit, Earlham, Lawrence, Kenyon (the preppiest in the bunch), Oberlin, Carleton, Macalester (in urban St. Paul). That should help your D get a feel for the type of culture that will best suit her and the qualities she’s looking for in a college. Then she can begin to develop her list and you can take your East Coast or Southern trip. As I look through this thread, basically every LAC in the book, from Davidson to Colby to Smith to Oberlin has been mentioned. There’s a world of difference among LACs. I think your D will be able to figure out her own preferences and drill down to what matters to her by doing a few regional visits. That way you won’t spin your wheels – and spend a fortune – visiting colleges that wind up being drive-bys!</p>

75

<p>The problem with the midwest is you can’t hit two of them the same day. Except for Carleton & Macalester, though I think the wife & kid did those on consecutive days as well. Oh well, it is what it is.</p>

76

<p>We did Kenyon and Oberlin in one day.</p>

77

<p>I stand corrected, good. I was blissfully ignorant since D1 was not interested in Kenyon.</p>

78

<p>A lot of people do Carleton and St. Olaf on the same day, b/c they are in the same town (Northfield, Minnesota).</p>

79

<p>re falloff in the quality of women’s college applicants: Begin with the end in mind! D friends from Mt. Holyoke are going to law school at Yale, Harvard, etc. vet school at Cornell, math PHD’s at Stanford, etc. Go where it’s easier to focus on your work. My D realized from the getgo that if college costs 50k per year, then students need to view it as their job from ages 18-22.</p>

80

<p>

</p>

<p>Possibly, but women’s colleges have also changed quite a bit since then. It’s also possible some of those alumnae of co-ed schools would have chosen to go single sex had they been able to take advantage of today’s opportunities.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not sure here what the point is. Single sex school graduates certainly hold their own when it comes to jobs and graduate school admissions vis-a-vis the Williams and Amhersts of the world. There are certainly enough highly qualified candidates out there so that neither single sex nor co-ed LACs need to compromise their admissions criteria.</p>