<p>I've seen posts on here and in college literature that mention an intense college experience, especially at smaller liberal arts colleges. However, I am unsure of what this really means. I do not see the colleges described as "intense" in most top 25 or 50 rankings(I am not talking just about US NEWS). Even though rankings do not represent the whole college, I am concerned about the quality of education at these colleges. A few examples of these "intense" colleges are Marlboro, Bennington, and Hampshire.
It would be great if you could explain to me why these colleges are considered intense even though their average applicant is not extraordinary. I do not mean to offend anyone who goes to any of these colleges. I know that these schools have produced some amazing people. I am just a little confused.</p>
<p>The answer is simple. they're not. words and phrases are thrown around here by psuedo intellectuals like "intense workload", "intellectually stimulating", and "hardcore" in order to justify certain colleges to one's self. It's also used by people who want to say "school X is more intense, and therefore better than school Y." Needless to say most top tier colleges have relatively equal amounts of work. I don't believe for a second that Swarthmore, W&M, and Chicago are so incredibly intense when their average GPAs are 3+.</p>
<p>However, what you WILL find is that certain programs are incredibly intense. Engineering is going to be hard where ever you go. Engineering at Caltech will be harder than at Engineering at NC state though. The students are brighter and more is demanded of them. But I doubt that a sociology major at Caltech is dying from an overwhelming workload.</p>
<p>Those terms can't be ranked simply because they're extremely objective. Something that's "intense" to one person maybe be "lame" to another. Plus, rankings are mostly based upon numbers like GPA, admittance, SAT scores, etc. These numbers don't really identify intensity of as school. </p>
<p>However, there are some schools that are known as intense. I've never heard of the ones you listed as intense, but a commonly known "intense" school is Reed in Oregon. People describe it as so hard that there are few parties, next to no double majors, and a high droppout rate.</p>
<p>I certainly would not consider Marlboro, Hampshire, or Bennington intense. In fact, I'd consider them the exact opposite. These schools promote a laidback atmosphere.</p>
<p>The philosophy of these schools is to provide an individualized education centered around each student's interests and experiences. Certain quirks result from this, like tutors (dons at Sarah Lawrence) and the use of narrative evaluations rather than grades. I suspect this highly individualized approch to education is what some referred to as intensity.</p>
<p>Hampshire's hardly intense. I have a good friend that attends, and she isn't dying from stress. Her classes aren't graded and she can therefore afford to take them for granted. She dislikes one class in particular, has concluded that it is useless and now puts in minimal effort in the class. There are no repercussions to her course of action. The worst possibility is that she passes the course with a mediocre evaluation (which employers and graduate schools will barely care about if she even shows them). Bennington is very much the same way -- you work as much as you want and still pass. There are no consequences to half-***ing. It's perfectly realistic, and very common to barely complete a paper, hand it in, have the teacher evaluate and correct some mistakes, and then do the paper over again until it's good -- after the teacher has essentially written the paper. No tests, no graded essays, nothing. How is that an intense environment? Only students that push themselves in those schools get an "intense" education. And, from what I'm told, not that many students push themselves at all.</p>
<p>I think Chicago is called intense because it tends to attract students who are unusually devoted to their studies. I really have no basis of comparison for Chicago's workload compared to other schools.... my impression is that workload varies more from course to course and department to department within a school than it does from school to school. </p>
<p>However, I do think that Chicago tends to attract an intense kind of student. Most of this is done through self-perpetuation. (Students hear that it's intense, those that want intense attend, those that visit the school are able to confirm that the students are intense, etc). I do happen to think that the Chicago breed of student is of a very specific kind of intensity that is highly unusual.</p>
<p>I don't know much about Marlboro, Hampshire, or Bennington, but my impression is that they attract students who like to learn. I will have to disagree with warblers-- Marlboro and Hampshire require independent projects, and to simply have the stamina to do an independent project is remarkable. My brother made it through an Ivy League school with writing only four or five papers and doing no original research.</p>
<p>Not sure where you get your information from Alchemy, but people "flunk" out of both Hampshire and Bennington all the time, take a look at the attrition rates. In part, because like you, they mistakenly think not much work is required, after all, there are no grades!! You might want to tell your friend that there actually will be repercussions to her "minimal work." </p>
<p>In fact the transcripts from these schools are very elaborate and anyone who might have seen your friends D for minimal work from a more traditional school will see many words, not just one letter, to that effect on her transcript. She does not get to "decide" which evaluations to show future grad schools or employers. </p>
<p>This is a common mistake, that because there are no grades one can be a slacker at these schools, in fact, the opposite is true. I think that these schools are often called "intense" because the people who attend are intense. They are very often people who are very interested in learning, in creating and who spend time thinking about their work long past class or homework time.</p>
<p>The other intensity factor is having to figure out, design and then defend your academic path. There is no list of classes given to you for any given major, where you just have to show up, do the work they tell you to do, and you get a degree. You have to actually figure out what classes you feel are important for a well rounded yet somewhat specific body of knowledge, and then you have to sell that idea to 3 to 5 professors all along the way.</p>
<p>And I can tell you, from personal experience, NO professors are writing our papers here at Bennington, in fact the expected level of work is very high. And Hampshire, in academic circles, is known as the "graduate school for undergraduates."</p>
<p>if anyone consistently uses the term rigorous to describe their school/or a particular course of study at "their school", be very assured that they are a shameless troll. This is one of the many things I've learned by observing/lurking this site.</p>
<p>Really? Don't you think most people feel their schools are fairly rigorous? If you are not working pretty hard, maybe you are at the wrong school.</p>
<p>What exactly is a troll? I have seen this term frequently on these boards, and I guess I get it in terms of someone bad mouthing another school, but what determines a troll in a situation where someone is saying something positive about the school that they attend?</p>
<p>Just like the conservation of electric charge, there "positive" trolls and "negative" trolls, depending on their perspectives.</p>
<p>Interesting....I think people should be careful about labeling others as trolls.</p>
<p>In terms of the original intensity post--I have to agree with earlier posters that colleges are often percieved as intense because of a certain intensity within the student body. </p>
<p>I have heard that word used to describe Reed and UChicago also, and it certainly fits with the students I know who have gone there. They have been intensely serious students and real intellectuals.</p>
<p>I think the basic feature of intense schools is that the workload assigned by professors (mainly heavy reading, or, in sciences, accelerated pace) leaves little time for anything else. The result over a sustained period (i.e., four years) can be significant, compared to less intense schools.</p>
<p>How is a college "intense" or "rigorous"? If it's called Chicago, Reed, or Swarthmore</p>
<p>I can't comment on the three schools you mentioned. I know nothing about them.</p>
<p>Some of the arguments on this board are absurd. There's one faction, for instance, that makes statements implying that all schools are exactly alike, and that "intensity" (whatever that is) is exactly the same at Reed and Southeast Outback Community College. I would venture a guess that none of these people has actually ever taught a college course, and certainly that none of them have ever taught at more than one college. They are basing their opinions on absolutely nothing; not hard data, not personal experience, nothing except a blind faith in their own ability to just know things without researching them.</p>
<p>I have been on the faculty at four institutions and have served as a visiting faculty member at three more. I regularly correspond with colleagues across the US and at a few places outside the US. I regularly attend congresses, symposia, and the like where I meet and discuss many matters with my colleagues, including pedagogy. I read the literature of higher education, and have served on two admissions committees. I currently serve on a task force with a mission of improving undergraduate education and measurement at my current university.</p>
<p>Despite all this, if there are useful, hard data on "intensity" and "rigor," I have not yet found them. There ARE data on such things as "student engagement," but I have grave reservations about the research methods and usefulness of the output.</p>
<p>Having said that, here is what my experience tells me.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>There ARE differences in institutions, and some of those differences can probably be encompassed by the words "rigor" and "intensity." </p></li>
<li><p>You will generally not find (and maybe never find) much rigor and intensity in schools where the average student is pretty average. (Note: I believe that alternative schools that use such things as experiential learning can be very intense when it comes to workload, without being very rigorous.) The reason you will not find much rigor at those schools (ones like mine) are simple: the average student is either incapable of performing at a high level, or does not want to put forth the effort. It is neither economically practicall nor politically feasible to intensify the material and grade rigorously in those schools. Too many would flunk out, and there would be very few As.</p></li>
<li><p>I highly question whether any school can be rigorous without a core curriculum demanding one to take legitimate (as opposed to remedial) courses in a broad range of subjects, including math, science, the arts, the social sciences, and the humanities. Ideally, math requirements would bring a student to at least calculus, sciences and social sciences would require mathematically challenging material, and the humanities would require deep analysis of a broad range of texts and/or source material. One would also have to learn to write extremely well in order to graduate.</p></li>
<li><p>Schools without strong leadership and a strong, institution-wide commitment to teaching and to desired outcomes of teaching are not likely to be intense or rigorous overall. There may be intense and/or rigorous courses, but they will be hit or miss. Note: This commitment must be real and not just the mouth-honor as it is in so many places.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I'm sure this is an incomplete list, and that I could think of more factors if I spent more time on it and contacted some colleagues. But do NOT think that all insitutions are exactly alike. I know from experience that they aren't, and I know from experience that I have had to dumb down my classes from one institution to the next.</p>
<p>I believe the subtle differences in schools may make for a tougher experience than at others. For example, is it standard to take four courses or five. That is a 25% increase in workload. Are the tests multiple choice or essay? Finally one of the biggest difference would be re final exams. Is it an exam of all the material from the whole semester or just from the most recent test which would cover about 3 weeks material. I was amazed talking with high school friends from other colleges that they almost never took a cumulative final. That would change the degree of difficulty from a 9 to a 3 for a college.</p>
<p>i repeat. "intensity" is completely subjective. someone with harvard smarts isn't going to find bennington intense. someone who is a dim lightbulb can find pinkerdink university intense. </p>
<p>do i expect more work to be had at a harvard than at joeblow u? yes, but i also expect that the students are smarter, and are able to do the work more efficiently than a student at joeblow u.</p>
<p>for all of you obsessing over these schools like bennington and the students who go there...remember: only 24% were in the top 10% of their class. only 62% were in the top quarter. how "intense" can the student body be if they weren't even the top students in high school?</p>
<p>True, but the OP's question is about comparing schools, not students within any given school. There may be a few students who don't find U Chicago intense, and some who find Valley CC intense, but averaging all students at each, U Chicago is clearly more intense than Valley; the average workload at U Chicago is much heavier.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For example, is it standard to take four courses or five. That is a 25% increase in workload.
[/quote]
That can cut two ways. Colleges with extremely rigorous courses tend to allow students to take fewer courses per term. Furthermore, you run into the problem of varying academic terms. Chicago students can take as few as three courses per term; Oxford only allows two courses per term. Even more drastically, Colorado College and Cornell College allow only one course per term! :p</p>
<p>I'm not sure that by "intensity" people always mean workload or even the difficulty of the work. I think it can also mean how seriously the students take the work they have, how much effort and thought they put in to it.</p>
<p>jags--I think you miss the point about who it is that goes to alternative schools. They are not always the kids who did extremely well in high school, for a variety of reasons, they didn't want to go with the program, were bored, are very strong in one area and not another, etc. Ask any high school gifted ed teacher if the smartest kids in his/her program are necessarily the ones getting the best grades in their classes. There is often a difference between someone who can do very well in school and a good, or original, thinker.</p>
<p>Frankly, there are many people who are very smart, did very well in high school, but who, by their own admission, would struggle with the freedom, and responsibility of some of the alternative schools. </p>
<p>I am not trying to put anyone down, or to say that alternative schools, or their students, are "better" just that who is "smart" is not always that simple.</p>