<p>So would Amherst be the Harvard of the three? There’s a big drop from H to Y/P and I don’t think that can be said of Amherst with respect to the others.</p>
<p>No, Amherst isn’t really the Harvard of the three. There isn’t a Harvard prestige-equivalent among LACs. (Though I wouldn’t call it a “big drop,” either.)</p>
<p>Frankly speaking, these threads sadden me. They really do. To see people this obsessed with the minutiae of which is more prestigious or more well known. Going to college ought to be about the academic experience and your personal growth. Pick schools for your own reasons, but please try and examine them in much broader picture than silly USNWR rankings or “prestige.” There are brilliant kids at Colby, Bates, Bowdoin and all the LAC’s. The campus culture may vary, sometimes by geographical and cultural differences. Sometimes by programs they are famous for, like theatre or languages or pre-med. </p>
<p>In the final analysis, we should not be pitting one school against another and taking “sides” or “teams” like its the Redskins versus the Cowboys. Its silly. </p>
<p>All colleges compete for the best and the brightest. From the first tier elites to the schools in the third tier. </p>
<p>I wish everyone the best, but it would make me happier to see people focused on finding the right “fit” and stop worrying about whether Williams is better than Amherst.</p>
<p>Amongst people who know about LACs, everyone will know all three, most will accept that AW are better (with or without basis), and in the end it wouldn’t matter too much which of these schools you went to.</p>
<p>That being said, I think Middlebury’s prestige is growing but suffers from the automatic association with language and nothing else. When you say Middlebury, those who know it most often respond “language”. When you say AW, they respond “top LAC”. Middlebury is probably both propelled forward and held back by this.</p>
<p>“Frankly speaking, these threads sadden me. They really do. To see people this obsessed with the minutiae of which is more prestigious or more well known.”</p>
<p>Ghostbuster, Best thing I have read in this whole thread. </p>
<p>I mean really, how someone can say that Princeton is a step down from Harvard or that Amherst is better than Middlebury. I mean come on. This is nuts. I am in my middle age and have the experience to tell all of you that it is what “YOU” make of your experience at college.</p>
<p>I think I mentioned in another post on this thread that it’s about the fit. Yet people stay focused on rankings and prestige. What a waste of time arguing over such pettiness. One year Princeton has the number one spot and the next it’s Harvard, yet we have people saying Princeton is a step down. Huh? It’s mind boggling.</p>
<p>Middlebury is a great school. Go there if you feel the fit is best for what you want and need.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that is changing. Language majors make up a small percentage of overall majors at Middlebury. The college has identified several “peaks of excellence,” one of which is environmental studies. Middlebury has one of the best ES program to be found at any college or university, and the word is out. The number of ES majors is growing every year, and that’s benefiting the other sciences as well (as is the college’s new science center, which is outstanding). International studies is another niche that Middlebury is known for. Midd’s reputation in this area is buoyed by the strong language programs, but also the college’s new affiliation with the Monterey Institute of International Studies. English and creative writing are other strengths. So while in the 70s and 80s Midd was known mostly for languages, the college’s reputation in other areas of study is quickly growing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>the problem with prestige is that it only matters among people predisposed to having an interest in the item in question in the first place and, the smaller that group, the more obscure the distinctions become. Amherst is prestigious because people say it is, that’s all. It can’t compete with Middlebury in terms of languages; it has no rep at all when it comes to music or art; its science rep is crumbling. Yet, it continues to be the “A” in AW because 1) smart kids continue to flock there, 2) it successfully manages to re-brand itself every few years, and, 3) in the tiny world of LACs there really aren’t that many to choose from.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fair enough, I did go back and you did answer the question in a reasonable and balanced way but sometimes someone writes something so outlandish, it makes it tough to get through the whole argument: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it is possible to discuss prestige in a rational and matter-of-fact manner without necessarily agreeing that one should automatically attend the most prestigious school possible. For example, I would state unequivocally that Middlebury is more prestigious than Carleton (and I’m applying to both); yet, if I got into both and FA was reasonable at both, I’d instantly choose Carleton–because it’s a better fit, though I’m fond of both schools or I wouldn’t be applying to both of them. That doesn’t change the fact that Middlebury is more “prestigious,” or that I’ll suddenly stop recognizing Middlebury’s higher prestige.</p>
<p>
While its offerings are strong for a LAC, much of Middlebury’s fame for languages comes from its summer institute, in which the vast majority of faculty members are not affiliated with Middlebury.</p>
<p>Its reputation for English and creative writing is similarly artificially buoyed by the Bread Loaf conference.</p>
<p>^ That’s an interesting point about the language faculty. I attended one of their language schools for 2 summers. Come to think of it, I only recall one instructor who was from the regular Middlebury faculty (though there must have been more at different levels or in other languages). Several (including the program head) were from Princeton. Others were from Harvard, Penn, Indiana, and elsewhere. Students were from all over, too.</p>
<p>Middlebury’s language intensive summer programs supplement the regular academic year offerings. Many faculty members during the summer months come from other institutions, but for the summer they are visiting Middlebury instructors. The instructors during the regular academic year are just as capable as those who teach during the summer, and Midd continues to offer more language options throughout the year than most peer schools. To suggest that Middlebury’s strength in language instruction is based mostly on the summer programs is ridiculous.</p>
<p>and, I say, trying to discuss LAC prestige “in a rational and matter-of-fact manner” without referring to the USNews rankings, no matter how sweetly and sincerely, is a little like trying to describle a spiral staircase without using your hands.</p>
<p>^A good way to describe a spiral staircase without using your hands is to use Mathematics.
Where is the data, what are the numbers, that measure “prestige”? </p>
<p>This is a rather old-fashioned, pre-scientific concept. It seems to carry the most currency these days among Asian immigrants whose cultures place a premium on “face”.
Other Americans like to claim their bragging rights, too, but tend to define it more on their own terms. If you don’t get into the #1, most selective school on your college list, then focus on what’s to love in the rest. If you’ve done your homework, there’s always something.</p>
<p>To describe a spiral staircase without using your hands: imagine a straight staircase going up, then coil it around so that it resembles lots of rising circles, similar to a conch shell or a Slinky.</p>
<p>One example of a school where prestige != USNWR ranking: Reed. In terms of prestige, I’d rate it equal to Carleton and Oberlin with name recognition and academic reputation.</p>
<p>To believe that Middlebury is mostly about languages these days is to ingore what has gone on at that institution for the past 15 years. Languages have given way to international studies, so that students in art history, economics, political science, anthropology, geography, philosophy, and other disciplines have the ability to do in-depth work in disciplines AND benefit by the unparalleled undergraduate language quality of Middlebury. In no way could this LAC be viewed as it is in many rankings, like them or not, if they had such narrow curricular strenghts. The natural sciences, with the new science center and remarkable science faculty, is a hidden strength, but for those who claim Middlebury is a language school, show they have not done their homework. The growth of the faculty since the mid-1990s has been about deepening the curriculum across the board and the results have been striking.</p>
<p>Arcadia is right: very few students “major” in the languages, yet >40% student to or beyond the 3rd year level which is quite remarkable when you consider there is NO language requirement at this supposed “language” school. Most importantly, the combination of the language depts and the 10 intensive summer language schools offers Middlebury students unparalleled language opportunities that most tack on to their liberal arts majors and broad curriculum. But excellence now extends to environmental studies and the sciences, and the overall balance of a broad liberal arts curriculum is quite apparent.</p>
<p>When someone talks about reputation or general public impression, it’s pretty much all about people who “didn’t do their research”.</p>
<p>There are two truths in this thread-- the quality of education at Middlebury is probably not super different than at Amherst or Williams and Middlebury is not considered as prestigious. It’s really hard to argue either of those points and there’s no need to defend Middlebury and talk about all its strong programs as some counter to the fact that most people who have heard of Middlebury associate it with strong languages and know little else and most people who have heard of Amherst and Williams are thinking, “Top 3 LACs”.</p>
<p>Perception does not always match reality, and prestige and reputation are not great factors to choose a school on, however, that reality still exists.</p>
<p>^^it makes you wonder what exactly is prestige worth?</p>
<p>I have no issues with the majority of posts in this thread, including the notion that Middlebury isn’t as prestigious as Amherst and Williams. The problem I have is with the characterization that A & W are “far” more prestigious than Middlebury. I simply don’t believe the difference is that great, and I think the majority of people would agree. The distinctions between and among the prestige of top LACs are growing smaller each year, as students are focusing more on individual academic strengths and fit.</p>
<p>Not only that. I’d go so far as to suggest that putting too great a distance between itself and other LACs is actually not that great for Amherst. Continually presenting the entire Ivy League with only three competitors just makes AW look like the last two houses on a bad block.</p>