<p>On PR's college list entitled "Their Students Never Stop Studying" Haverford is listed just before Swarthmore. I know Swarthmore is known for its intense academic environment, but my question is, is Haverford about the same or does it really deserve to be before Swat on that list? Thanks!</p>
<p>Let me help you answer this ? for yourself. Ask yourself these ?s...</p>
<p>1) Where do you think PR gets its data? (probably student surveys)</p>
<p>2) What is wrong with such data? (reliability, subjectivity and without a control group) </p>
<p>3) How many colleges are in the US? (many thousands)</p>
<p>4) Given that, do you think there is a significant difference among the top 10 or even top 20? (no... you're taking about the tip of the mountain top here)</p>
<p>5) If that's the case, why care about 2 schools that are "ranked" next to each other based on flawed methodology?</p>
<p>6) Why do you think Swat has a reputation for being the hot bed of stress and intensity that it has? (because it's a difficult school that likes to play that card up). </p>
<p>7) Why do you think HC does not have that reputation as much? (because it's a difficult school where talking about workloads is frowned upon cause everybody works hard... by contrast, at Swat, they make it a game... "misery poker")</p>
<p>8) What school culture do you think is harder? (no answer here) learning to not whine about tough workloads or being in an environment where people dramatize common issues in their life when they should just learn to deal?</p>
<p>9) If anybody, who can make "as close to" accurate comparisons as possible and what would their limits be?</p>
<p>-students taking classes simultaneously at differnt colleges (however, different classes, different professors, different expectations)</p>
<p>-students who transfer (however, same as above + different age+maturity called "maturation bias")</p>
<p>-people who, such as myself, with siblings 1 year a part at bryn mawr and swarthmore and had this conversation when we were 18 and who by 19 no longer care. :)</p>
<p>Agree with everything HCalum just said. The PR surveys are really bad. They depend on students stopping by the PR website and completing a survey. That's why their rankings jump around so much from year to year, even though the colleges themselves don't change. </p>
<p>I would also add that there is more variation in workload among different students at the same school than between the average students at two different schools. Take five courses instead of four every semester and do a double-major in Physics and Philosophy and, guess what, you'll work your you know what off -- doesn't matter where you go to school.</p>
<p>BTW, one reason that both Haverford and Swat are known for heavy workloads is that the classes are so small, students actually try to do the assigned reading so they don't look like babbling idiots during discussions. You can't just hide in the back of a lecture hall at either school. </p>
<p>IMO, that's a good thing, but some people might view having to do the assignments as a bad thing, I guess. I learned the hard way that college is so much more fun if you like the courses and want to do the reading. If that's not fun, then it's better to take a year off, work in a factory or something, and come back when you appreciate the opportunity. It's nuts to spend $40,000 a year and not be engaged by the academics.</p>
<p>Having attended classes at both HC and Swat...</p>
<p>No comparison. Swat is much tougher across the board. I'm sure you could find examples of gut classes at Swat and heavy ones at Haverford, and of course the field makes a difference. But the culture really is different, and it affects both the work that's assigned and the students' attitude toward it. When you take into account the way the honors program is structured at Swat...Haverford is not the same at all.</p>
<p>Point #9 please?</p>
<p>Hanna, I imagine you, as an ivy-trained lawyer, should be sensitive to the limits of anecdotes as evidence to argue for a case. If its not allowed in a court or in the published academic literature, why should you have lesser standards here? I know I try to not use such examples when I decide on treatments for my patients and when I analyze the merits of policy.</p>
<p>Especially considering you only spent at most 2 years at BMC before transferring, how many classes at HC and SC did you actually take to decide that there is no comparison across the board? I imagine such a definitive statement requires more definitive evidence. Given the tri-co van schedule that I remember, I know the answer cant be many. In addition, if you transferred sophomore year, how on earth can you even comment on the SC Honors program, as that is reserved for juniors and seniors? </p>
<p>Also remember that, for the most part, bi-co students only venture over to Swat (and vice versa) to take classes that are worth the hassles of a ½ hour commute and additional wait. Such special classes, anywhere in the tri-college, are generally a bit more intensive and advanced and thats what draws the kids over such distances. I doubt you left BMCs campus to take an intro or a non-challenging course at Swat.</p>
<p>HC Alum, is Hanna the sister who went to BMC?</p>
<p>somebody just got school-d</p>
<br>
<p>So is it your position that, short of a scientific study that empirically tracks the rigor of every course in every major, the relative cultures and overall academic intensity of two schools is just an unknowable mystery? Maybe MIT is tougher than UMass across the board, maybe it isn't...but at any rate, no one can be justified in having an opinion on that question based merely on the anecdotal evidence of taking a few courses at each school, and talking to their friends who are doing the same. Right?</p>
<p>That's basically what you're arguing, and I don't agree. The whole point of this board is to share anecdotal experiences. What I posted was an opinion based on personal observation. Others who are in a position to offer competing observations should offer them up as well. Then students considering the schools can give all those opinions whatever weight they choose.</p>
<br> [QUOTE=""]
<p>I try to not use such examples when I decide on treatments for my patients </p>
<br>
<p>Of course not, because that's a context where you ought to rely on science. You DO use anecdotal evidence on this board, though, which is where it belongs:</p>
<p>Quote by HC alum from another thread: "In my class, I can think of at least 9 people who participated/led sports who also were accepted into Harvard, MIT, Princeton and Brown... Two students who were key players on the basketball team from my year are currently in residency for orthopedics and neurosurgery"</p>
<br>
<p>In addition, if you transferred sophomore year, how on earth can you even comment on the SC Honors program, as that is reserved for juniors and seniors? </p>
<br>
<p>Because you don't always need to enroll in a program to know something about it (or even a great deal about it). How on earth could you even comment, in the thread quoted above, about Haverford's athletic recruiting in general, when you personally were recruited, at most, for only one sport. Every coach is different! How could you possibly have anything pertinent to say on the subject? Unless perhaps you learned it through years of close interaction with knowledgeable people who were experiencing it firsthand...which is how I learned about Swat's honors program.</p>
<p>Hanna: I think you over-reacted to HC Alum's post. And I do find it surprising that you were only at BMC for 2 years yet speak so authoritatively when you could only have taken a very few courses at each of Swat and BMC.</p>
<p>Actually, how many courses did you take at Swat and Haverford in your two years at Bryn Mawr? At least HC Alum spent four years at HC and his sister and brother spent four years each at BMC and Swat respectively.</p>
<p>I dont have issues with people expressing their opinions. My issue with your comments is that you seem to be stating fact and not just your opinion such as, NO COMPARISON (period). </p>
<p>If you say something is ACROSS THE BOARD, yes, I would expect you (and many high school students would assume) that you did take, at the minimum, one class in the 3 major disciplines of science, the humanities and social sciences as that would be across the board. All Im saying is that you speak from your own experiences and present it in that manner. Thats not an unreasonable thing to ask especially on a site where many (smart but unseasoned) high school kids get their information but may not have the savvy to inquire more deeply about the evidence. So in conclusion, your experience is not across the board and you dont have enough evidence to say that there is no comparison as you have little to compare.</p>
<p>And regarding the quote that you sampled, that was in context of a high school student asking whether athletes at HC deserve to be there. My comment was very appropriate and yes, I knew many smart recruited athletes (therere also a few jerks as well). This is a much different use of anecdote than what you used. My anecdote was saying that something is present (smart/cool athletes at HC) while your anecdote was used to say how your one experience can be APPLIED TO THE WHOLE. Do you not see the difference? </p>
<p>Yes, you can know the basic facts about something without going through it, but what you are arguing is that you can know an experience without going through it, which is completely inappropriate. For example, in health policy, many MDs will rant at how bad the US healthcare system is (which it is) and will look to Canada as a better model. However, although they may know facts and figures on costs and uninsurance between the countries, these American MDs have never experienced the Canadian system. Thats why, during my residency, I argued my way to spend 1 month on a rotation in Vancouver to experience it for myself and I was really surprised and disappointed at what I found.</p>
<p>Do you really mean exactly what you said with your last sentence? Theres something called the HC/SC rivalry so if you ask SC students about their thoughts on HC, dont you think it will be a wee bit biased because some of them chose SC>HC? You can also ask many HC people, such as myself, who chose HC>SC and I can give you an equally unlevel view but at least I recognize my biases. I also question whether you have any biases against the Bi-co as well?</p>
<p> now, as Im on my vacation and my girlfriend is in town, but is frowning at me, got to go and, no, Hanna and I are not related but I do think we may share similar social circles as she would have graduated from BMC in 1997 and I know several people who went to Harvard Law in the late 1990's.</p>