<p>mythmom, I’m sorry that you disliked my post. I tried to give an account of my own experiences and freely admit that others might differ. </p>
<p>That I did better in my Smith classes than my MHC ones (and worse in my Amherst ones) is just a fact. If I had taken different classes at the different schools, things might have been different. For some people (myself included), the math class I described was perfect. I would not have had the confidence to take an upper-level statistics seminar that was more traditionally taught, and in fact never took such a class at Smith. The MHC professor was very good, as I mentioned in my previous post, and we used a textbook he wrote for a Smith class I took the following year.</p>
<p>Similarly, if someone posted that Smith was in a “more removed” location than, say, Barnard, that wouldn’t strike me as “knocking” Smith, just as a comparison. Some people prefer a more rural setting, and would see the fact that there is a CVS down the street from Smith as a negative. </p>
<p>And if someone said they disliked a Smith alum they happened to meet, well, that’s one data point. I might try to figure out how it affected their opinion of the school, or if the things they disliked about the person were common among the student body (and if they were things that would actually bother me!), but that’s about all. There are plenty of nice and not-so-nice people at every school in the country.</p>
<p>I’m sorry. Apparently I was out of line. It just felt that way to me. It seems to me that Smith folk (not you) are always putting down Mt. Holyoke.</p>
<p>But your info might truly be interesting to others, and it’s true, I am not a one woman censor, and I’m sure your motives were just in the interest of providing information.</p>
<p>Congrats,** stuntedgiraffe**, and best wishes for your experience at Wellesley! It is a wonderful school and the campus is beautiful.
Thanks for letting us know. :)</p>
<p>I love both Mount Holyoke and Smith and am currently on both of their waitlists. Sigh.</p>
<p>But, after reading this thread, I wonder if it was a mistake not to try my chances at Bryn Mawr and Wellesley. (Please disregard the fact that I have been waitlisted at two Sister Colleges already. Haha.) I really wish I had applied to Bryn Mawr and Wellesley. They sound amazing! I would not consider applying to Barnard, however, because I have lived in New York City my whole life and I desperately need a change of environment!</p>
<p>As much as I hate to admit it, prestige does play a factor in my decision if I am ultimately admitted from either waitlist, which is very unlikely.
Based on the posts from this thread, it seems Wellesley and Smith are the most rigorous in terms of academics. Followed by Barnard, Bryn Mawr, and then Mount Holyoke?
Personally, I think all the Sisters have equal academic rigor, even if their acceptance rates may differ.</p>
<p>So why do people constantly ask me whether I have applied to Wellesley or Smith when I tell them I have applied to a women’s college? It’s almost as though those two colleges are the only women’s colleges they know. This is deeply frustrating.</p>
<p>I believe Barnard is equally rigorous. And most women take almost half their classes at Columbia, although many feel the Barnard courses are more rigorous.</p>
<p>@perfectionist – It might just be the circles you live in. Different people in different socioeconomic classes in different regions have different points of reference for things, and colleges are included in that.</p>
<p>Was curious to know if you were accepted off of the waitlist for Smith? All of the Sister schools are beautiful in their own right and each is academically challenging. I am a Smithie and my daughter attends Brynmawr. Although she loved Smith, she chose BC because of its proximity to Philadelphia.</p>
Kidding, of course! I’m sure you will LOVE Wellesley!</p>