<p>ha!</p>
<p>still remember the old days when parents would send their girls to finishing schools like Briarcliff, hoping for them to meet Princeton, Harvard and Yale boys…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Having visited both Scripps (Claremont) and Bryn Mawr/Haverford (Bi-Co), I contend that the Bi-Co is not equivalent to Claremont-level collaboration. To “access” boys at Scripps, you need only walk one or two suburban blocks. It’s a 2-minute walk, not a 10-minute bus ride (and the latter dependent on bus schedules). The distance between BMC and HC is about 5 minutes’ worth by car, but in practice, taking the bus is 10 minutes, not counting any time spent waiting at the stop. The academic (and to a slightly tenser extent, social) consortium DOES function as one school, but the physical proximity is not nearly as convenient as Claremont.</p>
<p>Commuting between Bryn Mawr and Haverford is kind of like living in an off-campus dorm at Swarthmore (which are undesirable, even if the actual rooms are excellent). A 15/20-minute walk seems very long if everything else is within 5 minutes… that’s one reason many people (including me) choose an LAC over a university.</p>
<p>Wrt to consortium gender ratios, Bi-Co is around 70/30 female and Claremont is around 60/40 (a function of Scripps being very small and two of the five colleges being majority-male). The 5-College consortium which MHC and Smith participate in is, excluding UMass, about 6.7 females to every 1 male (a number calculated by someone else, that I remember from a long-dead thread). You can decide for yourself how often you would “collaborate” socially/academically with the local flagship university, as opposed to the local top LACs.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Of course Hillary’s career is different, but the two things these former First Ladies have in common is:</p>
<p>1 They all three went to Seven Sisters schools and
2. All three first achieved national prominence and household name recognition on account of being the wife of a prominent politician.</p>
<p>I was planning on leaving it at point number one, which was my sole original point (post #47). It’s something the schools can be proud of just as I’m sure that Princeton is proud to call Michelle Obama an alumna. And in fact Smith IS proud of Barbara and Nancy since it lists both on its Notable Alumnae page. <a href=“http://www.smith.edu/about_alumnae.php[/url]”>http://www.smith.edu/about_alumnae.php</a> But you were the one who decided to try to dismiss Nancy and Barbara by calling them “wives” (post #50).</p>
<p>Coureur, I won’t answer, though I could, because StuntedGiraffe has asked us to stay on point. I am also omitting any Barnard remarks for the same reason.</p>
<p>I’m mainly interested in the humanities. My best (and favorite) subjects are visual art, history, and english. I am aware of the awesome art history classes at Smith, as I sat in on a class and talked to the professor last fall. I know that BMC is maybe not quite as strong in humanities as it is in sciences, but I know that Haverford has some excellent humanities courses. I’ve visited most of these schools twice, and I’ve actually taken the bus from BMC to Haverford and back. I’m used to commuting an hour each way to my high school, so the ride seemed very short to me, and I didn’t have any trouble visiting classes at different times at the two schools, as I did between BMC and Swat.</p>
<p>Can anyone speak to the strengths of each alumnae network? Smith’s is pretty strong, I know, and previous posters have also spoken about the strength of Wellesley’s, but can they, or anyone else, describe the comparison between the two as they found it, if their Ds looked at the schools, or what other networks are like?</p>
<p>(I’m not sure if I could have phrased that question any more confusingly or more complicated. 
Sorry about that)</p>
<p>I think it would be really really really hard for anyone to give you an accurate comparison of the alumni networks, because to a large extent, that’s rarely a visible thing when you’re just visiting the schools. It’s more something you tap into once you’re a student. </p>
<p>So I’ll just eschew comparison and say again that the alums of Smith have been nothing but amazing to me and I have been personally helped by them in getting the job I hold now, which is more or less my dream job considering i just graduated less than 12 months ago. They didn’t get it for me, but a Smith alum I had never met helped me get an internship which led over many years and a winding path to where i am today. Without her, I would not be here. </p>
<p>I’m also a member of the Smith Club in my area, most major metro areas in the US and Europe (and I think parts of Asia) have Smith Clubs, so I feel like you always know people whereever you move. The club in my area (DC) is very active. They organize volunteering in local schools and tons of events and get togethers where you can meet new people and network informally. They’ll invite prominent Smithies to speak or else they’ll just serve wine and we’ll have fun. They host lectures, holiday teas, etc. They’re doing a special Smith club only private White House tour this week. We have a tradition called Rose Drop at my Smith Club where we bring each newly admitted student in the area a rose with a note welcoming them to Smith College and explaing the tradition of Ivy Day, which is a graduation event at Smith where roses also feature.
Some of the Smithies also help provide low-cost student intern housing to Smithies who are in DC on tight budgets as interns. </p>
<p>And I like that you can literally meet Smith alums everywhere. I like to bring my Smith sweatshirt on trips and see how many people will stop me. I don’t think I’ve ever been stopped in a new place by at least one person who either went to Smith or was the parent of a Smithie, or the former boyfriend/girlfriend of one. </p>
<p>And (sorry, a lot of additions here) Smithies keep ties and support strong for the school. We raised over $7 million for the Smith fund this year, according to a thank you call I got from a student (I don’t make much, but I chipped in a few dollars and I plan to give more if I’m fortunate enough to do so in the years to come).</p>
<p>Keilaxandra, the OP is not considering Scripps so why bring up the comparison?</p>
<p>
fyi … the Barnard-Columbia agreement is about as easy as it can be … travel involves walking across the street … and the registration processes are integrated (no special registration reguired)</p>
<p>PG, because Hanna specifically said wrt Bi-Co:
which I would counter is simply untrue. Barnard is similar to the very unusual Claremont-level collaboration. BMC/HC is a very close consortium, but simply not to the level of those two. There may be other very close consortiums, I don’t know; I’ve only researched the top women’s colleges.</p>
<p>The OP did not apply to either of the schools with the strongest “coed” consortiums. Of the schools she is choosing among, I would agree that Bi-Co is the strongest consortium–it’s far from a balanced coed environment, though, even at HC parties.</p>
<p>stuntedgiraffe, although I understand your desire to keep this thread focused on you, topic meandering (certainly broadening, and often outright digressions) are a fact of forum life.</p>
<p>I don’t think you should be picking a college based off the consortium it offers, I really think you have to look at the strength of the school itself.</p>
<p>When you isolate this to the schools themselves, I think(this is my opinion only, I’m not trying to pretend otherwise) that Smith and Wellesley come out way on top. They have their own incredible classes, their own incredible resources, and their own amazing alumnae networks. Not that the other two don’t, but Smith and Wellesley really go above and beyond. The two schools are also different enough that one of them will offer something to suit your personality. So, if you’re limited in visits, go see those two and decide!</p>
<p>Good Luck!</p>
<p>^But of course, the Bryn Mawr people will argue (fairly) that Haverford’s academic resources should “count.” The schools have even deliberately split certain departments.</p>
<p>I have no dog in this race; I’m going to Swarthmore, but I didn’t apply to either Bryn Mawr or Haverford. And the Smith Boosters can attest to my general critique of women’s colleges.</p>
<p>Personally, I believe very strongly in the idea of “personality” among liberal arts colleges (less so for large universities). Bryn Mawr, Smith, Mt. Holyoke, and Wellesley all have distinct personalities… the trick is to judge them for yourself and find the one that fits you best. That said, I echo previous sentiment that the schools are also more similar than different in the grand scheme.</p>
<p>"You can decide for yourself how often you would “collaborate” socially/academically with the local flagship university, as opposed to the local top LACs. "</p>
<p>I’m going to pretend you didn’t really write that. Because…that would cause a whole different diversion to the topic of this thread. With all of the threads about top notch students attending state flagships for financial and other reasons…it is likely students at the LAC’s will find plenty of people at UMASS to collaborate with socially/academically. I certainly did.</p>
<p>All of the 4 women’s schools on stuntedgiraffe’s list have alumnae clubs throughout the US. All have both formal and informal networking opportunities with alumnae. You will find information about these connections on the school’s websites.</p>
<p>Based on post #85, seems like MHC has dropped out of contention. It’s a very special place – with all of the traditions, heritage and excellence of the other schools – but it needs to be a place that feels right to you.</p>
<p>^You can PM me if you want to continue the discussion, but I will say this: I stand by my previous statement, controversial as I know it is. UMass is a different kind of environment, both academic and social. By academic, I am NOT referring solely to rigor, though that is one aspect. I assume that many students who attend LACs do so for the uniquely intimate opportunities.</p>
<p>Rocket: Let me say that I think Smith is a fabulous school. However, different schools have different ways of offering incredible opportunities, and it is not always better for a LAC, which face it, has limited resources, to offer everything themselves.</p>
<p>IMO, Smith, being relatively isolated is at a disadvantage relative to Bryn Mawr. For example given that Philly has a number of world class art museums, does it matter that Smith has their own and BM doesn’t? </p>
<p>As the parent of a full pay student of a kid who isn’t interested in engineering, should I really be impressed that Smith funded a fabulous engineering program that BM doesn’t have simply because that means they’ve gone “above and beyond” for engineers? </p>
<p>It’s really hard to guess what will make a fabulous college experience for any given person, but I’m pretty sure it can’t be boiled down to the school that offers the most stuff.</p>
<p>qialah-the OP was soliciting OPINIONS on her school choices. I gave her my (clearly labeled) opinion about her choices. I explained the criteria I would use to evaluate such a choice, and the conclusion I would come to</p>
<p>I’m not saying that one school is inherently better than another, but If I had to choose, Smith or Wellesley would be my pick</p>
<p>I said I wouldn’t do this, but Barnard/Columbia is not a consortium; for all intents and purposes it’s one school. Columbia claims Barnard’s athletes and they play on Columbia’s teams. As many Columbia kids take courses at Barnard as visa versa. There is not distinction between a Bio section at Columbia or one at Barnard. Kids take the one that fits their schedule. D had 50% of classes at each campus. She went to the Supreme Court with a “Columbia” class.</p>
<p>Doesn’t make it a better choice for a particular student. Just correcting facts flung around here.</p>
<p>Back to OP – I think all these schools have strong academics and much to offer. I hate when the five sisters are in competition with each other. I’d rather they helped each other out. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s a given that BMC automatically has more to offer than Smith. The cultures of each school are different enough that I think there are women who would prefer each of the four.</p>
<p>I had friends who each sent a daughter to Smith at the same time. One thought she’s awakened in Paradise, and one left in disgust. I was so disappointed that the second didn’t go to MHC. I just had a sense that Smith wasn’t “her” place. </p>
<p>I think the OP should choose the school that makes her smile the most when she walks on campus. Polaroids might be necessary. Mom – watch the smile factor. Happiness is an important criterion too.</p>
<p>2boysima: MHC is still in the running, I’m just not getting as much financial aid from them and people don’t seem to be posting as much on MHC than the other three.</p>
<p>Keilexandra: I’m not trying to keep the thread focused specifically on me, just on the general discussion. I know there are other families in similar positions. Obviously deviation is inevitable; I was just trying to keep it focused.</p>
<p>Again, just a thank you to everyone who has posted thus far. It’s all very helpful!</p>
<p>sg: If MHC is giving you less money I see no reason to choose it unless you’re madly in love, which doesn’t seem the case.</p>
<p>I find that odd because it gave my D the best package.</p>
<p>If one package is substantially better, and you feel that you like each equally, why not attend that school?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As someone with a daughter who is also looking at the same four schools (W, BM, Sm, MtH), though who is a junior and not an accepted senior making a decision, I have to say I’m agreeing with Consolation that there must be a “Smith Mafia.” Because I am really frustrated that whenever questions are asked about these schools – acknowledging upfront that all four schools are of the highest caliber and that a bad choice cannot be made – instead of hearing factual discussion or relatively-neutral statements comparing their campuses and opportunities, there’s always a “But Smith is best for everything under the sun in all possible ways and you’ll love it!!!” </p>
<p>Part of what concerned me about Smith for my daughter was the overall feeling of being unnecessarily “in your face” and I have to say it gets reinforced by what I see on line. If I wanted a place full of people who were all up in people’s faces about their school being the very best and beating everyone else on all dimensions, I’d send her to Duke (/joke).</p>
<p>^^Pizzagirl-my first post on this thread was fairly neutral. I explained by bias as well as the PROS and CONS of all the school…as the discussion progressed, I simply wanted to put in my opinion on the schools. When you’re making a decision, I think most students want subjective opinions along with objective facts. I gave the OP both</p>
<p>It seems like some posters only want subjectiveness if it favors a Seven Sister OTHER than Smith…:D</p>