<p>
</p>
<p>I think that’s the whole point. It’s kind of hard to argue that Grinnell and Carleton aren’t closer to Williams than they are to Dickinson/Gettysburg/F&M. I mean, really - if you’re in the top 20 - or in this case, top 10 - LAC list, you’re splitting hairs pretty finely to draw too many distinctions. If given a choice between Williams and Grinnell, or Williams and Carleton, I’d say to my kid - pick on personal preference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We explicitly took S’s school off the table precisely because it was close, and schlepped our kids hither and yon. I am a real big believer that it’s a good thing to be aware of and play around with going to school in a different part of the country; my personal “dream school” for S was in WashDC, not here. </p>
<p>I went to hs in the St. Louis area and while there were certainly kids who went to good, elite schools all over (indeed, more so than my kids’ hs), the mentality was that the sun rose and set on Mizzou, and WashU for the smart kids. I HATED that mentality and my family did college tours on the east coast. When it came time for my kids, we explicitly said to them - the entire country is your oyster, and gave them starting selections from all over. Even in my kids’ hs - the default choice for the smart kids is Northwestern, which irked me to no end and was a reason I took NU off the table for S until he insisted that it go back on. </p>
<p>I will always remember a conversation in our extended family with H’s younger sister, who had a job opportunity in her mid twenties to go to (I think) Paris for 6 months or something of that sort. And the whole family sat and cried and boo-hooed that she would be gone from home. And meanwhile I’m thinking - what a great opportunity, when do I book my plane ticket to go see her? It just stuck with me, and I get frustrated at the midwest provincialism - and then I see it on CC just as much with people from the northeast who don’t dare venture beyond the Hudson. Just a pet peeve, which we all have!</p>
<p>Haha. That’s because you’ve never been to Williams. I’m just kidding. Totally. I agree in substance, I just think the three “lesser schools” in this case, are pretty up there, too.</p>
<p>Barnard is #27 or #31 depending on the year, but the education was as rigorous as Williams. And I find this irrational since almost half of DD’s courses (because of her major not preference) were at Columbia which ranks highest than most of the colleges above Barnard. And further, the Columbia classes were no harder and her Columbia GPA slightly higher.</p>
<p>I am just suggesting that it’s a subtle process with many variables.</p>
<p>I don’t think Wellesley is necessarily better than Barnard even though its endowment is higher and it is many spaces up on USNWR. OTOH, I don’t think Barnard better even though it is slightly more selective by the numbers. (I know Wellesley’s test scores are slightly higher; usually Barnard’s GPA is slightly higher. The schools have slightly different priorities.)</p>
<p>I would have been happy to attend either school. Or Williams. Or, gasp, Dickinson.</p>
<p>Well, pizzagirl, I understand your feelings which I share to a much lesser degree, but I wasn’t going to make my kids go west of the Hudson when they didn’t want to. Their argument was: There are so many wonderful schools in the NE why do I have to leave? And why do I have to take a plane and go far away?"</p>
<p>DD went to London; DS to Florence and Rome, so it wasn’t fear. They LIKE it here, and they like seeing us. </p>
<p>For myself, I would have wanted more of an adventure, I think, but they didn’t. Just the way it was.</p>
<p>But sophistication about schools all over the country is growing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually I have been there, and FWIW, my nephew who is finishing up his soph year at Princeton had been accepted at Williams and did seriously consider it. It’s lovely. I’ve been to Grinnell’s campus (which is also quite amazing - the $ there is incredible, thankyouwarrenbuffett), though not Carleton or Macalester – we were going to do a Minneapolis school tour and that’s when the kids said - enough already. Two good friends of mine are Carleton grads - both on the board of trustees - one went to NU Law, the other to Harvard B-school and both are quite accomplished.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t either (think that W is better than Barnard, that is). I think all the historic Seven Sisters schools are quite good and it comes down to personal preference. D’s second choice was Bryn Mawr, which is somewhere in the 20’s, and that would have been perfectly fine compared to Wellesley, which I think is tied for 6 with a bunch of schools. I still maintain, however, that Carleton and Grinnell are at a higher tier than G/D/F&M, and I do think of them as having a much broader “net” in terms of where their student body comes from compared to the PA schools, which is an important consideration in my book.</p>
<p>But Pizza, the phenomenon you describe works in reverse as well. I could name 10 schools in my region which are known for taking slacker wealthy kids from around here whose work habits or general laziness preclude the schools that the top kids aspire to. But leave this area and you hear of the Vals and Sals from the rest of the country who work hard precisely to get admitted to these places.</p>
<p>That doesn’t make these schools bad by any means. And some of the rich slacker kids indeed buckle down when they get to college, so clearly some maturity and the presence of the “strivers” was the right ticket for them. But it does demonstrate that the “school in my backyard” syndrome cuts both ways. I’m sure if I polled my neighbors (who don’t work in higher ed or who don’t read resumes in bulk the way I do) they’d have a vacant stare if I mentioned High Point or Lake Forest.</p>
<p>I want to give a shout-out to Pizzagirl: I’m with you completely on this one. </p>
<p>And, I live on the East Coast, went to Williams, my son now attends Grinnell and we visited Dickinson which went off the list after he got an EA acceptance (Bard).</p>
<p>All of these schools had fine campuses, close access to professors, wonderful programs, etc. etc.</p>
<p>But, my son’s first priority was perceived fit with the student body: and that’s why he chose Grinnell. On the spreadsheet, Grinnell wouldn’t necessarily have been the first choice, and it was the hardest to get to and from. So, “on paper” it was the tough choice to make, but it was the right decision, and very brave of him, we all thought, to pick this one.</p>
<p>I recently was in Chicago and had lunch with a college friend and her parents, and they all said that out there, Grinnell was far better known and prestigious than Williams!</p>
<p>When we tell people here where my S goes to college, we always preface it by saying, “he goes to school in Iowa at Grinnell College,” to forestall the inevitable, “Oh, Cornell, how wonderful.” People who’ve never heard of Grinnell just smile and nod; while those who are familiar with it, almost gasp and say, “oh what a fabulous school!”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe it. Makes perfect sense out here.</p>
<p>mythmom, not to put you on the spot, but … would you have been indifferent towards your son attending Williams versus attending Gettysburg/Dickinson/F&M? Or would you have said / thought … there is some difference in the caliber of student and level of opportunity, which is not to say that the latter aren’t perfectly fine, but there is a difference?</p>
<p>Because if your answer is yes - it’s pretty hard not to argue that Carleton and Grinnell aren’t the same level as Williams.</p>
<p>Finally had a chance to read this whole thread. The ACT difference between Carleton/Grinnell group and Dickinson/Gettysburg group is about 2-3 points. Is that significant? Dickinson has students from 44 states and 44 countries, while Grinnel has students from 50 states and 50 countries. Again is that significant?</p>
<p>
I think it is. It’s not a huge difference, but I think it’s a difference that will be reflected in the classroom.</p>
<p>These schools are close enough that there may be many reasons to choose a Dickinson over a Grinnell–finances, for example. But all other things being equal, you’ll have a somewhat more challenging class of peers at Grinnell.</p>
<p>“The ACT difference between Carleton/Grinnell group and Dickinson/Gettysburg group is about 2-3 points.”</p>
<p>No, the difference is greater than that. The first group requires test scores, but all three schools in the second are test-optional. There is no question that test-optional policies lead to the admission and enrollment of students with lower test scores – that’s the entire point of the policy.</p>
<p>We know that the PA schools’ true ACT ranges are lower than reported. We just don’t know by how much. Of course, lots of people believe that the scores don’t matter. But if you do think they matter, the difference is greater than it looks.</p>
<p>I do think Grinnell and Carleton are at the same level as Willuams, and I would love to go to GRINNELL and see what the money has bought. But I would have been fine if my DS had said that the competition at Williams was too much for him and he’d rather go to Bard where he was also accepted EA. I probably would have questioned the choice of the PA schools because the “fit” doesn’t seem there – Greek life, etc., but I think he would have known this for himself. I’ve already said I prefer the higher ranked schools, and I do consider them the equal of Williams in academics, though I suspect Grinnell may have slightly less grade deflation, which is in its favor. I just don’t think the differences so great as to be vehement about it.</p>
<p>As a college professor I love colleges and would like to see all six in the sample. </p>
<p>I am very aware of a friend whose daughter went to Dickinson and has a wonderful and successful time including a year in Spain, and another whose D us graduating from Gettysburg after setting records as a runner and winning a Fulbright and spending time in Sweden. Both of this young women are accomplished, extremely successful, brilliant, proactive and competitive in the job market. Neither is from PA. Both are from NEw England. I don’t think Carleton, Grinnell, Macalester, Barnard Wellesley or Williams could turn out better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Any school can scare up a student from almost any state, big deal. It’s the concentration that I care about. A school which draws the vast majority of its students from its own state and/or adjacent states isn’t something that’s broadly appealing to me personally. </p>
<p>Actually, the better measure would be done on a distance basis, since state boundaries are meaningless (Stanford draws a larger % of its pop from CA than Brown does from RI simply because CA is a much more populated state). And even then, you’d have to correct for population density (for example, a school in the NE will draw a greater % of students from within, say, 250 miles compared to a school in the midwest just because the NE is more thickly populated and there will be a greater % of the college-age population within a 250 mile radius of NYC than Grinnell, Iowa). But conceptually you get what I’m driving at.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Road trip with mythmom!</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: I would love that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, it’s likely to be a known in that region college - so far, unnamed. ;0</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t go about it that way. Sometimes I do ask fellow acquaintances what they think about college ____ to see if they’ve even heard of it or have an opinion, but in general, I prefer to ask employers what they think about colleges. In my circle we have quite a few varied employers and this has remained true through various moves we’ve made over my (adult) years (NY - upstate, VA, FL, RI, & PA).</p>
<p>With the exception of specialties that require grad or professional school, employers who hire undergrads straight from college have schools they show preference to, some they know nothing about, and about half the time, schools they show bias against. The “preference to” schools have always been known in THEIR region and/or if they are alumni or close to a school for other reasons (grew up around it, etc).</p>
<p>I’m sure I haven’t seen all employers. I have, however, seen enough that I’ll stand by what I’ve seen as being more the rule than the exception - for new hires. 
</p>
<p>In a shaky economy, who wants to look up a college they haven’t heard about when they don’t have to?</p>
<p>Colleges known in their specialty field have no issues (we went with this), but many grads get “a” degree for a more common job with someone hiring who prefers a school they know.</p>
<p>SHOTGUN!</p>
<p>On the road trip, I mean.</p>
<p>ps While I totally agree that I WISH people wouldn’t be so regional (having lived in multiple areas and really enjoyed all of them), the reality is that most people are. That reality shows up in a lot of local hiring. Once the first job has been successfully gotten, others tend to look upon work experience rather than college names (at least, in our fields they do). Getting the first job can be the kicker - esp in this economy.</p>
<p>And yes, I’ll agree that locals know the schools to tend to stay away from as well - usually based upon the experience of someone hired from there or kids who choose to go there (and are surprised that some might aspire to go to those same schools).</p>
<p>Much of this is true all over the country. It doesn’t matter which region. I’ve seen it everywhere we’ve been, both big city and rural.</p>