<p>So it seems like the big difference is between AW and S. In fact, A seems like it has more "problems" per capita than W. Why the singling out of Williams?</p>
<p>Gosh, so much heat for three little boutique institutions that are bare pimples on the butt of American education! ;)</p>
<p>Let's not remember the things they have in common - besides excellent profs (though not any better than two or three dozen others), fantastic (almost hideous) endowments, hugely supportive alumni, selective admissions, and students virtually all in the 18-22 age range (this is statistically quite an outlier if you were to look at U.S. undergraduate educatin generally, where the median age of an undergraduate is 24.5.)</p>
<p>Student bodies are, by any reasonable measure, extraordinarily wealthy at all three. By looking at the percentage of students on grant financial aid, and computing what it would take to afford the $180l+ at each institution, the median Swarthmore family likely earns around $175k, at Amherst maybe $200-$225k, at Williams higher (maybe $250+). In terms of American family income, this is stratospheric. </p>
<p>All three have significant financial aid-receiving families in the $100-$160k (at Amherst, it seems that it is likely about half of all those receiving aid, at the others a little bit lower). All three have a contingent of students from families with incomes below $40k, with Amherst being the highest. What this essentially means is that there are very, very few students representing the bulk of the U.S. population - the middle and upper middle classes - $40-$100k - at Amherst, and very few (as opposed to very, very few) at Williams and Swarthmore. I am willing to bet that the bulk of these at Amherst and Williams are athletes, and URMs at Swarthmore.</p>
<p>If you visit all three, you quickly discover how much more a part of campus life athletics and alcohol are at Williams (especially) and at Amherst than at Swarthmore. Frankly, I don't think there's anything particularly wrong about that - many of the students like it that way, and chose that way - unless students don't know that going in. </p>
<p>"I've no doubt that Amherst has more minorities than it did thirty years ago (what college doesn't?) But, that doesn't mean it's any less preppy."</p>
<p>Don't automatically be so sure: Princeton, for example, has fewer African-Americans today than it did in 1971. There are large gains, both at these institutions and nationally, in the percentages of Hispanics and Asian-Americans. But it is virtually certain you are correct: more URMs are coming from wealthy and/or preppie backgrounds.</p>
<p>From what I can tell from the Williams data, the school is less economically diverse than it was 25 years ago; I suspect (but don't know) that the same is true at Swarthmore; and only recently changed at Amherst. </p>
<p>Clery Act data provides one data point, but it is always hard to interpret. The police department in highly rich suburban Swarthmore certainly operates differently than that in very rural (and snowy!) Williamstown, or UMass-centered Amherst. </p>
<p>At 1500 students, there are certainly some very undersized departments at Swarthmore and Amherst, fewer at Williams. This will have an impact - if, in a 4-person department, your advisor takes a sabbatical, and one prof gets sick, there goes your graduate school advising and your mentoring. </p>
<p>There are weakish departments at all three schools. Foreign languages at Williams (especially Romance languages) wouldn't make the top 50. Music at Amherst and Swarthmore are not strong - but maybe strong enough for the students they attract. Languages are somewhat limited at Amherst and Swarthmore; I know that the former relies heavily on the 5-colleges to remedy that. But again, it may be strong enough for the students they attract. </p>
<p>Each has particular departmental strengths as well.</p>
<p>And if you asked 90% of the American public about any of this, they'd say "where is Swarthmore?" what is an Amherst? and did you mean "William and Mary"?</p>
<p>Actually, you've got the undersized departments backwards. The undersized departments at LACs tend to be the largest departments, especially those seeing unanticipated growth. A perfect example is the doubling of Econ majors at Williams in the span of a single year. Even though the Econ department is one of the two largest departments at Williams, they are drowning in majors...in a geographic location where it is very difficult to hire non-tenured faculty. It would be much easier to hire an extra body or two in the five-college area or in Philadelphia. The very small departments are small because there aren't many majors. Often, these departments have "too many faculty" because it's almost impossible to scale back departments as demand decreases (see the universal debates about Classics departments). Remember, you are only talking about 1500 or 1650 students at Swarthmore or Amherst.</p>
<p>The scale of any small LAC means that a school can't be all things to all people. For example, if you want to study a language that is only spoken in one small country, a small LAC is probably not the right school. There are large LACs that specialize in languages, like Smith, for those students or a large university, like UMass, that teaches every language on earth. However, with 1500 students, Swarthmore offers language instruction in seven languages: Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish. I don't think there is much demand beyond that. Do they lose students who want to study Swedish? I'm sure they do.</p>
<p>"It would be much easier to hire an extra body or two in the five-college area or in Philadelphia. The very small departments are small because there aren't many majors."</p>
<p>It is easy for any of these colleges to hire an extra body or two, but that is exactly the problem. They can't provide the ongoing mentoring that the prof on sabbatical did, or the sick prof. did. There may be few majors, but those that there are will suffer as a result. </p>
<p>But in the main, you are correct: students at these schools do best in very mainstream majors. And the schools generally speaking have departments large enough (though perhaps not diverse enough) for the students they attract.</p>
<p>"the Econ department is ... drowning in majors...in a geographic location where it is very difficult to hire non-tenured faculty." </p>
<p>The 26 Economics profs on the Williams faculty (not to mention an additional handful of visiting profs) -- 17 in residence the entire year -- for (at the upwards end) approximately 90 majors in each class results in a senior to prof ratio of 3.5-5.3. Not exactly "drowning."</p>
<p>And because they, like the students, are a self-selecting bunch, it's not too difficult to attract excellent faculty drawn (again, like the students) to the pristine northern Berkshires area. Williams is amazingly successful at hiring its first-choice teaching candidates. </p>
<p>To the OP: to get a feel for Amherst, and to decide for yourself how it compares to other colleges, it's best to visit several and form your own opinions.</p>
<p>"with 1500 students, Swarthmore offers language instruction in seven languages: Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish." </p>
<p>With 2100 students, Williams offers language instruction in eight languages: Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish (majors in six).</p>
<p>"students at these schools do best in very mainstream majors"</p>
<p>Small in number compared to the departments with more majors, Williams students in such departments as Computer Science have gone on not only to top-ranked graduate programs but employment at companies like Microsoft and Intel as well.</p>
<p>It can be stated that students in the non-"mainstream majors" do every bit as well.</p>
<p>Such generalizations are so tiresome -- and so expected, considering the source(s).</p>
<p>onemoremom said:</p>
<br>
<p>And because they, like the students, are a self-selecting bunch, it's not too difficult to attract excellent faculty drawn (again, like the students) to the pristine northern Berkshires area. Williams is amazingly successful at hiring its first-choice teaching candidates.<</p>
<br>
<p>well, that's a little disingenuous. Sure, there may be some self-selection involved where a freshly minted-Ph.D may be interested in a peculiarly Williams oriented sub-specialty (the economics of higher education being one.) But, mostly it comes down to money: Williams pays a premium to get young, unmarried post-docs to spend the next five years in rural western Massachusetts.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The 26 Economics profs on the Williams faculty (not to mention an additional handful of visiting profs) -- 17 in residence the entire year -- for (at the upwards end) approximately 90 majors in each class results in a senior to prof ratio of 3.5-5.3. Not exactly "drowning."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The Class of 2007 had 134 Economics majors, more than 25% of an entire graduating class.</p>
<p>They've basically restricted many of the upper-level electives to seniors who need them as a graduation requirement to get through the year.</p>
<p>They've changed the curriculum and math requirement for future Econ majors and managed to drive the number of declared majors for next year back down:</p>
<p>
[quote]
But in the main, you are correct: students at these schools do best in very mainstream majors.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course. LACs were never scaled to offer a WalMart SuperStore experience. They are mom & pop stores, offering a style of learning that emphasizes critical thinking and communications skills almost independent of the declared major.</p>
<p>If you want the LAC style of education and a non-mainstream major, then you have to factor that into your selection process as most top LACs typically offer strength in one or two specialty majors. For example, linguistics or engineering at Swarthmore, art history at Williams, law/jurisprudance at Amherst, languages at Smith, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And because they, like the students, are a self-selecting bunch, it's not too difficult to attract excellent faculty drawn (again, like the students) to the pristine northern Berkshires area.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Apparently, Williams is having trouble attracting a dean to live in the Berkshires. The newly appointed Dean of the College lives in Amherst.</p>
<p>Anyway, my point was not about attracting long-term faculty, but the ability to quickly address a short-term need. For example, if an Economics professor dies in August and you need to find a good professor fast. I believe that pool of qualified professors is larger in both the 5-college area and Philadelphia, simply due to the large number of colleges and universities.</p>
<p>Frankly, location is an issue for long-term hiring as well, especially now that the decision to accept a position often means sorting out job prospects for a spouse.</p>
<p>"Apparently, Williams is having trouble attracting a dean to live in the Berkshires. The newly appointed Dean of the College lives in Amherst."</p>
<p>Meow. </p>
<p>Dean Merrill maintains a residence in W'town, as she has for years as a member of the faculty. She can make the approximately one-hour drive to Amherst as she sees fit.</p>
<p>There are so many highly qualified newly minted Ph.D.s and post-docs out there that there is no problem getting fine faculty to teach at any of four dozen august liberal arts colleges, and another four dozen universities. After all, the jobs are considered plums.</p>
<p>And who gets to teach at which one has almost nothing to do with the so-called relative quality of these institutions but rather who had a particular opening in a particular subspecialty of a subject that year. </p>
<p>"It can be stated that students in the non-"mainstream majors" do every bit as well."</p>
<p>Let's rephrase that - I agree it was poorly put. The risk to a student attending a school where there are few faculty in his particular department (even if they are all excellent) is greater than in one where the department has many more faculty, can share the load of sabbaticals and illnesses and unexpected leavings more readily, and is better set up to provide mentoring and advising should those leavings and illnesses occur. </p>
<p>"With 2100 students, Williams offers language instruction in eight languages: Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish (majors in six)."</p>
<p>Let's not go overboard here. The MAXIMUM number of classes one could take in Italian is exactly three (with one faculty member, a visiting professor from North Adams State) - it would even not qualify a Williams student to compete for a space in a Smith or Wellesley or Middlebury JYA program, let alone get in. (To be fair, Amherst sends all its Italian students over to Smith, where they are regularly shut out, as the requirements for the Florence JYA program are so strict that the on-campus requirements are oversubscribed.) The French Department (among the largest language departments) is tiny, and there are no on-campus immersion opportunities (a quick comparison with, say, Pomona, will quickly highlight the differences); similar is true in Spanish. Arabic is offered for one year "in a self-instructional fashion under the tutorial supervision of trained native speakers" - there is no faculty. </p>
<p>Which isn't to say Williams isn't GREAT at some things. This just ain't it.</p>
<p>"Let's not go overboard here."</p>
<p>Simply stating the facts.</p>
<p>And Williams students study abroad for a semester or two throughout Europe -- including Italy. There are several junior-year programs available for them to do so.</p>
<p>"Arabic is offered for one year 'in a self-instructional fashion under the tutorial supervision of trained native speakers' - there is no faculty." </p>
<p>Arabic 101-102 (Elementary) as well as Arabic 103 (Intermediate I) has been and may be taught next year by Williams Prof. Vargas, who is good enough to have worked as an instructor in Intensive Arabic at Middlebury during three summers in the past few years. Williams is also looking to hire another tenure-track professor of Arabic. Arabic 104 (Intermediate II) will also be offered.</p>
<p>As in other departments, not every course is offered every semester/year.</p>
<p>Mini stated:</p>
<br>
<p>And who gets to teach at which one has almost nothing to do with the so-called relative quality of these institutions but rather who had a particular opening in a particular subspecialty of a subject that year.<</p>
<br>
<p>Mini, I think what you are saying is just wrong; it's a back-handed way of saying that there's a glut in Ph.Ds and LACs are free to take advantage of candidates who have no other prospects. Maybe that's the way it appears from out there in Washington State, but, Back East, I assure you the competition for faculty entails all sorts of incentives, including pay, housing and quality of local schools. And, even if I'm totally off base here, and you're correct -- an awful lot of people at Williams seem to agree with me:
<a href="http://www.ephblog.com/archives/000701.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ephblog.com/archives/000701.html</a></p>
<p>No, I am saying that the history department at Macalester lost its specialist in the French Revolution the same year as Wesleyan didn't give tenure to its specialist in the Middle Ages, and so the best French Revolution Ph'ds competed for the position at Macalester that year, and the medievalists for the position at Wesleyan. Two years later, Macalester needed a medievalist and Wesleyan a French Revolutionist, and they got 'em the same way. But which one taught at which school was almost entirely a matter of the available opening in the year they were seeking.</p>
<p>And, of course, each candidate, and each school, will work to cut the best possible deal to serve their interests, and there's absolutely nothing wong in that.</p>
<p>"(with one faculty member, a visiting professor from North Adams State)"</p>
<p>Prof. Nicastro, who has been at Williams since 1983, was previously at Mass. College of Liberal Arts -- which was formerly known as North Adams State College. (North Adams State College existed by that name from 1960-1997 -- there is no longer any institution called North Adams State College.)</p>
<p>"The French Department (among the largest language departments) is tiny"</p>
<p>Five professors teach in the French Department at Wiliams; one is on leave this year. For the small number of French majors at Williams (averaging fewer than five per year), 5 PhDs teaching a variety of French language and non-language courses is incorrectly referred to as "tiny." It's all relative.</p>
<p>As I indicated earlier, the degree to which generalizations and old/misinformation is regularly posted by a couple of people who think they know it all is really very tiresome.</p>
<p>Williams Italian students can't even qualify to APPLY for any of the programs that require fluency, or in which classes are taught in Italian. The quote I made about Arabic came from the Williams Arabic website itself. There are NO on-campus immersion opportunities at Williams in French, Spanish, Russian, or German.</p>
<p>As you noted, "not every course is offered every year". Well, if you have a special need for Elementary Arabic, that would leave one pretty out of luck, wouldn't it?</p>
<p>Nothing particularly wrong with that - not all schools can or should be all things to all people. (I would offer a similar critique of Swarthmore or Amherst's music departments relative to that at Williams, but I think the point is already made.)</p>
<p>An active four-person French Department IS tiny. But, as you say, it is likely sufficient for Williams' current needs - that is the point.</p>
<p>Yes, Nicastro now comes from a North Adams College with a fancier name. ;) He teaches three classes (though not every course is offered every year), and the demand on his services is very small, as it should be, when there are so many great LACs with much richer offerings in his specialty.</p>
<p>"Nicastro now comes from a North Adams College with a fancier name"</p>
<p>Prof. Nicastro has been at Williams for 24 years.</p>
<p>Your cute emoticons don't diminish the fact that your constant denigrating is anything but. Too bad you didn't enjoy your time at Williams.</p>