Haverford, Swarthmore, Williams, Middlebury, or Bates

<p>Those are the schools under consideration for my D after many college visits - several other were ruled out after visits (Colby, Bowdoin,....) because they just did not "feel right". Have yet to visit Swarthmore and Haverford. Interested in studying biology and mathematics, and participate in sports. Wants a strong and friendly academic environment but not overly intense, wants to be with students that enjoy the outdoors, wants environmental awareness and plenty of vegetarian options, wants to be in an active environment and participate in sports but not a "jock" or "fill-the-stands" environment. Most of all wants down-to-earth nice fellow students and teachers that are not snobby, pretentious, or preppy - and smart students that are not all about intelect or shows-offs. She can probably get in to any school, but does not feel a need to go to the most prestigious she can get in to. Wants a happy 4 years and a strong academic experience. Where? </p>

<p>She expected to like Middlebury most, but it almost felt "too nice" (Stepford Wives?). She was surprised to find that she really liked Bates - probably the least prestigious and easiest to get in to of the group. All visits were in the summer with no students around.</p>

<p>Haverford sounds perfect for your D.</p>

<p>If you haven't seen these... I think these resources might be of interest to you and your daughter. They address/provide more information about the issues you mention above.</p>

<p>Haverford</a> College News Room</p>

<p><a href="http://www.haverford.edu/admission/files/chronicle_august07.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.haverford.edu/admission/files/chronicle_august07.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Haverford</a> College Office of Admission: Admission Videos</p>

<p>Thank you pointoforder - those are really helpful linkes. My D is particularly interested in the sciences, and possibly med school, so this was very relevant. Yes, Haverford does sound like it could be a good match, and we will be visiting it (and Swarthmore) in October. I am of course curios about the Haverford-Swarthmore comparison - is Haverford more "low key" academically that Swarthmore, is it more about balancing studies with fun? Also, what is the "green" factor - the environmental awareness and concern - like and the options for vegetarians at Haverford (and Swarthmore), and how about an active and outdoorsy student body? Those are factors that are quite positive at Middlebury, Williams, and Bates, but unclear for us about Haverford and Swarthmore.</p>

<p>There's a lot to handle/answer in your questions. But I'll try.</p>

<p>Let me start with the most difficult one first, which deals with academics. I think you'll get lots of perspectives on the academic intensity issue. First, I think they are both excellent and intense. IMHO, I think Haverford, Swarthmore, and Williams are in a different league than the other two you mentioned. Now, between Swarthmore and Haverford, in particular, Swarthmore has the reputation of being the most intense of all LACs in the country. In my view Haverford isn't far behind that, but it may be behind it when it come intensity. To clarify I don't think Haverford is behind Swarthmore in excellence or quality of education, but I think the culture values other things so students attracted to it are generally a bit more well-rounded, though still quirky and intellectual.</p>

<p>I think one of the best posts I've seen on this was written by StARz782, who wrote as follows: "There's a girl in one of my Haverford classes from Swarthmore (who I noticed is very smart but modest, contrary to the claim that all Swat kids like to talk about grades). I asked her what she thought was the main difference between the two schools; she replied that it seemed to her as though Swarthmore professors hold their students to almost unattainable, 'impossible' standards for the purpose of keeping them from settling for average work. Thus, this would probably result in a stressful, pressure-cooker environment that the students actually create for themselves because they want to do well and were the type of students in high school that did, in fact, do well. This of course, is not to say that Haverford students are slackers or underachievers. On the contrary, I think what has been said (but perhaps in the wrong words) is that Haverford students strive to be PARTICULARLY modest about grades due to the honor code and the intensified, hit-over-the-head pressure to be careful about students treat each other as human beings. There also seems to be more of a social presence at Haverford (this is not to say that Swarthmore students don't socialize, just the degree to which they do is not as great as at Haverford). So perhaps this explains why it seems as though Haverford students don't 'work as much' - because they're spreading their time more evenly between academics and other things than maybe a Swarthmore student, who prefers to focus more heavily on academics. And of course, this is not to generalize both of the schools as a whole- you'll find Haverford students that never leave the library and Swat students that maybe don't fit the typical stereotype of workaholics. In the end, I think Haverford students can do just as well as Swarthmore students (and they do). . . I personally was debating between the two colleges in my own college selection process; it just seems that Haverford presents a different approach of educating its students than that of Swarthmore. Naturally, for one type of person, a Swarthmore education would deem as better for what they personally need; but others might learn better in the type of environment that Haverford provides. . . So for some, Swarthmore is a better school; for others, Haverford is a better school."</p>

<p>I think Haverford College, including the faculty, affirmatively embrace the notion that the College's mission is to educate the whole person, which incorporates notions of values, ethics, social skills, social awareness in additions to academics.</p>

<p>That said, I know that my two closest Haverford friends and I all worked quite hard in College. Between the three of us, we have four graduate degrees all from Harvard University. We all found Haverford more challenging, more interesting, and more transformative.</p>

<p>Haverford is definitely committed to the envrioment. For example, the brand new athletic center is a unique "green" building and among the first sports facilities in the U.S. to qualify fr gold-level certification by the U.S. Green Building Council for sustaniable design. Here's some more evidence:</p>

<p>Haverford</a> College</p>

<p>Job posting from August 2008:
Haverford</a> College Environmental Chemistry Tenure-track Faculty Position Advertisement</p>

<p>Going</a> Green @ Haverford</p>

<p>Haverford's</a> Gardner Center Wins Praise at Clinton Global Initiative</p>

<p>With respect to the vegetarian options, all I can say is on-campus there are plenty of options. Overall, the food at Haverford could probably be better. But, it is supplmented by great off-campus options (certainly better than Williams, Middlebury, and Bates) because of its close proximity to Philadelphia. There are great vegetarian options on the Main Line where Haverford is located as well as in Philadelphia, the nations 5th largest cities. See VegPA.net</a> | Vegan and vegetarian eating in Pennsylvania</p>

<p>For outdoorsy, I think Williams and Middlebury will have Haverford beat. But I think Haverford will take Swarthmore here. About 40% of HC students play a sport, but it's not jocky. (Williams is far more jocky.) BTW, check out Haverford</a> College: Haverford Outdoors Club (HavOC)</p>

<p>Also, you should be sure to read the following post: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/427212-why-haverford-sciences-phenomenal-part-12-a.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/427212-why-haverford-sciences-phenomenal-part-12-a.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>At the end of the day, I think the visit in October, to both schools, will be particularly helpful. Good luck to your D.</p>

<p>Hi pointoforder,
It’s nice to see another alum on here. As you’re new, I’d caution you about the time sink that is CC and the trap of internet addiction... terrible terrible thing. </p>

<p>Respectfully, I’m not sure if I agree with “not in the same league” (or maybe I don't understand what you mean?). My guess is that there are probably 4000 colleges and universities in the US, so if we’re talking about the top 50-100, I think in terms of providing a solid undergrad education and academics, I think all these schools can play ball... </p>

<p>Curious Dad
I would give a 2nd look to Colby, Bowdoin and Middlebury if possible. Summer visits are random and it would be awful if your daughter made the wrong decision based on a glance. Bowdoin has a great environmental studies program if I remember correctly and I hear its students are really friendly. </p>

<p>My 2 favorite LACs remain Haverford and Swat.</p>

<p>I think an important difference between the schools you mention is location. I’m really not one to cite myself, but I discussed it here…</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/502502-help-me-decision-due-tomorrow.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/502502-help-me-decision-due-tomorrow.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>IMO, things that make HC unique are its Quaker traditions, modesty, sense of community and mission. Swat has some of these things too but I don't believe to the same degree. </p>

<p>A little bit about the college from an alum (HC/Stanford Law)
[PROSNTZ2[/url</a>]</p>

<p>Quaker Bouncers
[url=<a href="http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2006/01/24/Opinion/Partying.Like.It.Should.Be-2145943.shtml%5DPartying"&gt;http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2006/01/24/Opinion/Partying.Like.It.Should.Be-2145943.shtml]Partying&lt;/a> like it should be - Opinion](<a href="http://www.chilit.org/PROSNTZ2.HTM%5DPROSNTZ2%5B/url"&gt;http://www.chilit.org/PROSNTZ2.HTM)&lt;/p>

<p>Honor Code
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/326716-report-cheating.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/haverford-college/326716-report-cheating.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>188 varsity athletes got up at 7AM to volunteer for Special Olympics 8th</a> Dimension: Special Olympics at Villanova!</p>

<hr>

<p>Something about the food at HC. Trying to buy local and go green.
<a href="http://www.haverford.edu/news/files/Spring2008.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.haverford.edu/news/files/Spring2008.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
IMHO, I think Haverford, Swarthmore, and Williams are in a different league than the other two you mentioned.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What a ridiculous statement. You had many valid points in your post, but that comment pretty much takes away your cred.</p>

<p>Thank you all for various comments. I know that summer visits with few students around doe not give you the best representation of the school, but I think my D ruled some out for some reasons for her that are still valid. At this point Bates, Middlebury, Williams are still on the list, and we will be visiting Swarthmore, Haverford (and prossibly Wesleyan) soon. I have a feeling Haverford may be added to the list, but she/we do have one concern about the biology program. I know it is excellent - one of the best in the country. However, it is very cell/molecular focused, while at most other colleges they tend to be a bit more broad and offer courses in cell/molecular, organismal (e.g., anatomy, physiology, etc.), and population (e.g., ecology) biology. My D is a very strong science student, and will likely major in biology, but has found chemistry the least interesting - cell/molecular biology is quite "heavy" on chemistry.</p>

<p>You might also look at Vassar whose biology department is strong as well.</p>

<p>Arcadia, I don't think your comment added any value to this discussion. </p>

<p>C-Dad, I think you have to ask your D why she feels biochemistry, molecular/ bio-med, chemistry doesn’t appeal to her. Is she not into these fields or could it be because how it’s taught in HS isn’t very applicable to one’s life, is more theoretical and harder to grasp? </p>

<p>HC’s bio is molecular/bio-med and, among LACs and even some universities, HC really does own this for the reasons I’ve listed in past posts. If she’s interested in environmental issues, the new wave of science and environmental science is really molecular bio and bio-med. The greatest impact on the environment is <strong>us</strong>. There’s a class taught on tropical/infectious diseases where the kids (non-science) actually had their work published in a peer reviewed journal. By addressing the deaths associated to infectious diseases (mostly children), developing countries may improve their environmental status cause less kids will need to be born per family because more kids will be able to survive into adulthood. Famine and deforestation can be improved through genetic modification of plants. We had a sophomore bio-lab 10 years ago where we introduced foreign genes into plants using viral vectors and learned how new crops of modified rice rich in vitamin A can be grown to prevent blindness and also the potential pitfalls with this type of genetic manipulation. If your daughter is interested in the environment, these topics, along with bio-fuels, environmental chemistry, HIV, how DNA works and how it can be damaged by toxins and UV light/ozone… all this is HC’s specialty. BMC’s bio is organism and systems based and they are excellent. </p>

<p>If she’s interested in med school, I don’t think there are any LACs better at preparing students for this. HC’s former pre-med advisor (my advisor) use to be a clinical professor at Penn and she was also the daughter of the chair of medicine at Johns Hopkins. She and the strings she could pull were awesome but she recently retired. The current pre-med advisor, now like other pre-med advisors, is a PhD but she was one of the senior career counselors at Penn before HC. HC also has 2 physicians on faculty (one being the current president and alum Steve Emerson who was the head of Heme/Onc at Penn and the other being a pediatrician and alum who has headed numerous vaccine trials and teaches a class on, well, vaccines). Hc’s location is also great for pre-med students because of the opportunities it allows for visiting physicians and scientists to come onto campus… in the last year, stem cell researchers, neuro-radiologists teaching about PET scans, public health physicians, ect… not to be had if you’re not close to a major city. Also, being close to a city allows easier access to volunteer opportunities that are important for personal development and med school as well. </p>

<p>Finally, even if HC’s academics were an ideal match for your daughter, I wouldn’t encourage her or anyone else to apply if HC’s particular campus culture as expressed in the honor code didn’t resonate on some level. If she is interested, I’d recommend in addition to taking the HC tour also taking the Blue Bus over to BMC as you can then appreciate the resources available to a HC student.</p>

<p>HC Alum. That you for your very thorough response, and terrific information. I am sold, now let's see about my daughter. I think HC could be a good fit for her, and something she may want to consider along with the three she has curerntly narrowed it down to (Williams, Middlebury, and Bates). The honor code and how it uniquely adds to HC is something that will resonate with her - that is a big plus, and not an issue at all. I suspect how her chemistry has been taught at HS is much of why it did not appeal to her as much as the other sciences (although she still win the award for most outstanding chem student) - a bit too theoretical, I suspect. The link to environmental science and human health/science that you describe would probably make a big difference. She is interested in med school, and I do recognize that HC's med school prep is excellent. The main potential drawback I can see, for my daughter, is actually the location - close to Philly and hospitals is nice for some, but close to mountains and the hiking/biking trails appeals even more to my daughter. We may be visiting in October so that will help, but unfortunately it is during fall vacation at HC so no tour is available (info session is, and hopefully some students will still be around). We would certainly include a trip over to BMC to get the larger picture.</p>

<p>Hey guys--</p>

<p>As Arcadia and HC Alum have noted in one of my earlier posts I wrote: "First, I think they are both excellent and intense. IMHO, I think Haverford, Swarthmore, and Williams are in a different league than the other two you mentioned."</p>

<p>Just to clarify, I think "a different league" may have been misinterpreted (perhaps b/c of my poor word choice). Of course in the grand scheme of schools they are all in the same league of top LACs, which is why I said they are all excellent. (When I meet someone who went to any of the 25-30 "top" school I feel a kinship. )</p>

<p>That said, I think there are differences or tiers within the group when you start cutting it more finely. So, when I was writing that I was thinking of only the top 20-25, and within that group of excellent schools I think of them in about 5 different subgroups. What I meant is that, I think of 3 of the schools the OP asked about in one subgroup (actually along with two other schools the OP didn't ask about) and I think about the other two named schools in a slightly lower subgroups (relative to the other top LACs). </p>

<p>If I were using a 5.0 scale these subgroups would be rated 4.9, 4.8, 4.7, 4.6, etc. I mention that to say that they are all excellent and I'm making very fine gradations among excellent schools. I realize that by saying "different leagues" made it seem like the differences were greater than I intended to convey. </p>

<p>BTW, I don't mean to be defensive, but I just adore and respect virtually all of the top LACs and I think each one can be right for a different student.</p>

<p>pointoforder--
Your point is well taken. And I understand that you're simply offering your own assessment of each college's comparative strengths and weaknesses. I disagree with your opinion, however, that Middlebury is in a different tier. In fact, you're more likely to hear Middlebury grouped with Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore than you are Haverford. By nearly all metrics, Middlebury’s student body is as qualified as Haverford’s. Metrics don’t tell the whole story, but they are the only standardized empirical qualifiers that we have.</p>

<p>Nearly all published rankings place Middlebury ahead of Haverford (sometimes by a comfortable margin). Haverford does beat Middlebury when it comes to the percentage of graduates who go on to get PhDs. But it's worthwhile noting that just as many Middlebury grads get doctorates as Haverford grads, the main difference being that Middlebury is more than twice the size of Haverford.</p>

<p>We do agree on at least one thing--that the schools mentioned are among the best in the world.</p>

<p>“In fact, you're more likely to hear Middlebury grouped with Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore than you are Haverford.”</p>

<p>Uh… and this is based on your experience as a <em>Middlebury</em> student?</p>

<p>First, I think you do a disservice to Middlebury by trying to “lump” it in with those 3 schools. It seems a little insecure… like you’re trying to fit in with the “cool kids.” Well, as I’ve pointed out, at least for 2 of those 3 schools, there are issues (location and size) that can be argued to negatively impact the education received so I don’t know why you assume them as the gold standard. They’re great but not perfect. Instead, you should be arguing what makes Middlebury unique… in the case for HC, it would be a top LAC close to an urban center, provides a small community feel yet offers the resources of a school twice its size, phenomenal sciences and its mission statement. How does Middlebury distinguish itself from Williams? That should be your focus, not on how it can fit in… </p>

<p>CC reminds me of politics. I think for the majority of people, colleges, like candidates, are decided upon 1st and the facts are then selected and interpreted to fit one’s conclusions. Arcadia is probably referencing the US News rankings where Middlebury was #5 for 2 years in a row. I guess I should point out that 20 of these college presidents (from #1 to #20) all stated that the rankings were flawed. For example, “alumni giving rates” may have more to do with how aggressive colleges go after alumni dollars than how happy alumni are with their college education. For example, a few years ago, Pomona sent out $1 bills to their alumni and asked them to mail them back. Regarding selectivity, 2 schools, Amherst and HC have only 1 ED where 33% of an entering class are enrolled. By contrast, other schools, like Middlebury, fill between 39-55% of their classes ED, so there is less risk in the volatile RD pool and less students need to be admitted. This artificially lowers acceptance rates when compared to HC and Amherst (between 2-5%) but considering how close these schools are in terms of selectivity and quality, an unfair tweak here and finger on the scale there can change “ranks” which should really be measured in millimeters and not “tiers”.</p>

<p>If I was biased, I could blindly site ### “rankings” and facts that put Haverford well ahead of Middlebury without explaining their limitations as I’ve done in the past even when the rankings favored HC. For example, the WSJ rankings, HC’s larger endowment per student, PhD rankings where HC is consistently among the top LACs while Middlebury is far behind (even for the humanities which is Middlebury’s strength). I can also point out that the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the primary funder of undergraduate research has given Haverford’s science program $5,450,000 since 1996 (#1 for LACs) while Middlebury hasn’t won a grant since 1996 ($650,000). Again, the WSJ rankings are imperfect, endowment per student is overstated for reasons I’ve listed before and the PhD rankings are powered to show no difference between LACs and the Ivies, not that 1 school is better than another. But at least I’m fair about it. Regarding the HHMI grant $, well… :)</p>

<p>I can also point out that reputations depend more than just 2 years of a US News cycle which is shorter than the lifespan of the Rubix cube. Consistency matters too… that HC has 4 Nobel Prizes, and in the last 10-15 years graduated the chief editors of both the LA Times and the NYT, the chair of chemistry at MIT, the presidents of Cornell, Emory and U Washington, dean of Stanford Business School, current dean of faculty of both Princeton and Williams, the current head of the biomedical research program at Johns Hopkins, the current head of the American Archeology Institute and the congressman who coined the term "partial birth abortion." Oh yeah, and if you’ve ever heard of Harvard’s Framingham Heart Study and intravenous nutrition, there's a Haverford alum there too. </p>

<p>I think the top 10 LACs <em>all</em> have notable alumni so I think it’s a little odd to argue that the fleeting opinions of a magazine ranking make a significant difference on reputations that are built upon decades of accomplishment. People, and especially those in positions of power and knowledge, know better.</p>

<p>Actually, the women's college, and only one of those ranks in the top ten, have awesome alumni as well. One might argue that this was before coed education, but this isn't entirely the case.</p>

<p>In the case of Barnard, for example, Jhumpa Lahiri and Edwidge Dandicant are recent alums and winning literary prizes galore.</p>

<p>I do think schools go through fads. Middlebury seems very hot right now for reasons not necessarily having to do with quality, though these reasons do not negatively reflect on its quality. The emphasis on internationalism and environmentalism which it is known for are very appealing to current HS grads, so Middlebury is standing in front of many schools.</p>

<p>Perhaps the serious Quaker tradition of Haverford produces modesty that cause Haverford to go unrecognized as the amazing gem it is. Sad, maybe, but part of what makes it Haverford.</p>

<p>Williams real Yankee attitude makes it refuse to promote itself as well.</p>

<p>I can't imagine than anyone could go wrong at any of these schools in terms of the education. After that, it is about fit or what a particular student is looking for.</p>

<p>I can't see the need to assert that one stands before the other. (Not for you HC Alum because I don't think you're doing that.)</p>

<p>True love, like love of one's school, should make us appreciate everything else more and not engender competition and disdain for other schools.</p>

<p>
[quote]
First, I think you do a disservice to Middlebury by trying to “lump” it in with those 3 schools. It seems a little insecure… like you’re trying to fit in with the “cool kids.”

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not really. I'm just reiterating what has been said many times before. Like the Time Magazine article on the New Ivies that states:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Smaller liberal-arts colleges—like Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Swarthmore and Wesleyan—were the destinations of choice for top students who preferred a more intimate campus.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>America's</a> 25 New Elite 'Ivies' | Newsweek Best High Schools | Newsweek.com</p>

<p>I'm actually surprised that Haverford wasn't included in the new ivies list. I think it's a great school that deserves recognition.</p>

<p>And I only mentioned that because pointoforder implied that HC, Swat, and Williams are in a "different league" than Middlebury and Bates (post 4). It seems a little insecure… like he's trying to fit in with the “cool kids.” </p>

<p>I group Middlebury with Amherst and Williams because they share many of the same characteristics. Outdoorsy student bodies; bucolic campuses nestled in the hills of New England; well-funded, successful sports programs, etc. Their applicant pools overlap significantly more with each other than with Haverford. Middlebury and Williams are similar sizes. I admit that Middlebury has less in common with Swarthmore.</p>

<p>What makes Middlebury unique? Besides the obvious (size, location), its language, writing, environmental studies, and international studies programs are among the finest in the country. It also has an honor code (Haverford is certainly not unique in this respect). Its commitment to the environment is second to none. It has one of the best athletic programs in the country, and facilities that rival many D I schools. It has schools abroad in 30 locations throughout the world. It has maintained its place in the LAC hierarchy and remained competitive despite the fact that its student body size has grown by 25% in the past two decades.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Williams real Yankee attitude makes it refuse to promote itself as well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hogwash. You really think that Williams doesn't promote itself?</p>

<p>Mythmom, I use “top 10” in a very generic and inclusive sense… which “top 10” list? US News, Newsweek, Atlantic Monthly, HHMI awardees, PhD, WSJ, endowment, ect…? When I counsel pre-meds, I often tell them that there are about 20 med schools that consider themselves in the top 10 and they are all correct.</p>

<p>The 7 Sisters have certainly produced accomplished alumni and I also believe they will continue to do so. Yes, they lost a bit of their luster but they still attract a contingent that could have gone anywhere but chose to walk a less expected path… originality is an important key to success. </p>

<p>Arcadia, I think you’re doing it again. Why are you putting weight behind this article? Do you think Newsweek got a bunch of acclaimed academics together to come up with a consensus list of “New Ivies” for you to reference? More likely, they got a bunch of late 20’s-early 30’s year old writers together over donuts, coffee and a deadline to brain storm this pop culture “Hot” list. If you don't use Wikipedia in your term papers, you should keep similar standards here and not cite trash.</p>

<p>Uh, I believe that statement used the word ** “like” **, so it’s not an inclusive listing. How about this, “New York City is a tourist destination because of attractions like Broadway and Central Park.” Hopefully, you’d recognize that there are a few more interesting things in NYC than these 2 places. Wellesley, clearly more “Ivy” than Middlebury and Wesleyan, isn’t mentioned in that sentence. Also, that list is a joke. Since when is Bowdoin and Colgate “New Ivy?” In fact, I believe Colgate almost became an Ivy when that league was created way back when… and Bowdoin is as New England Blue Blood as it gets. Again, hanging Middlebury’s reputation on a byline in a ‘zine article (and suggesting that there’s significance with a school not being explicitly mentioned in a sentence clearly not meant to be definitive) makes Middlebury appear desperate for validation. </p>

<p>Why isn’t Haverford mentioned in the list of “New Ivies?” Well, the 1st intercollegiate soccer game ever played was between Haverford and Harvard… with Harvard’s team founded by Haverford alumni in grad school; the 3rd oldest intercollegiate rivalry is Haverford and Penn cricket, dating to 1853; alums include early presidents of Penn and Johns Hopkins; the 1st American to win the Nobel Prize in chemistry; the captain of Great Britain’s “Chariot’s of Fire” Olympic team who also won the Nobel Prize for founding the League of Nations. That’s pretty venerable stuff. Even today, Haverford is the only Philly LAC in U Penn’s stem cell consortium. At least that Newsweek article got something right by not including Haverford as “New Ivy.” </p>

<p>3</a> local projects get tobacco settlement grants - Philadelphia Business Journal:</p>

<p>Finally, I never stated HC’s honor code makes it unique. In fact, I’ve often stated that there are several schools with honor codes. Each school though conceptualizes its honor code differently and, so, are differently implemented. Davidson’s and UVA’s are based upon a sense of southern honor and chivalry; military honor for the military academies; Athenian ideals of a perfect democratic society for Wellesley and Conn College; and Haverford’s is based upon its Quaker history and value of consensus and inner light. Some schools have codes that emphasize academic/social conduct 1st… Haverford’s culture encourages kids to inner reflect and think about respect and trust, which are then manifested by the freedoms and responsibilities described in its honor code. Context gives each honor code its own character.</p>

<p>Lovely post, HC.</p>

<p>actually, Wesleyan <em>was</em> mentioned in that sentence. But, you're right, all of this fuss over a two year old 'zine article is foolish.</p>

<p>Hey, Wesleyan is our big brother (you have more students!) Hi, Wes.</p>

<p>The idea of that article is so transparently a marketing ploy for the magazine as well as for the schools mentioned, well as a academic I can only say, ''nuff said".</p>