<br>
<blockquote> <p>Barnard turns out more writers than any other undergraduate program.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>mythmom, on what basis do you make that claim? I'm extremely skeptical--how could such a thing be determined??? And if I were making a guess, Barnard would be nowhere near the top of the list.</p>
<p>Even though Oberlin's in a small town, it's a really self-contained campus that has so much going on that there's really almost no need to get off-campus to go to fun things. And if you think Oberlin's location sucks, I don't know if you visited Beloit but after I visited the two it felt like Beloit as a town had a lot less to offer than Oberlin does.</p>
<p>Anna Quindlen, Stephanie Klein, Zora Neale Hurston... if Barnard doesn't turn out more women writers than any other college, believe me, it certainly seems like it does.</p>
<p>dave72: Google the NY Times article on the subject. That was my source.</p>
<p>unalove: Jumpha Lahiri and Edwidge Dandicat are two current prize winning fairly recent grads.</p>
<p>unalove: Yeah. I'm checking Chicago out. Honestly, I'm a bit skeptical, because I've heard comments from people I know who went to Chicago and then transferred out (along the lines of "sucks the life out of you"). I guess that's just a personal thing, but when people are so vehement about their dislike of certain places, it kinda worries me. On the upside, I know some people who really want to go there, so it can't be all bad...</p>
<p>ctParent2006: Brown definitely... But I visited Vassar last year and, while the trees were great (I got yelled at for climbing one of them), I just really didn't like it there. I'm not sure why. It surprised me, actually. Thanks for the suggestions!</p>
<p>mythmom: Thanks! The all women thing is sort of a turn off, partially because I kind of feel that having an all women's or all men's school is sort of... wrong... And also because my mom went to an all women's school for one year and then transferred out. But I'm considering Smith so there's no reason why I shouldn't consider Barnard.</p>
<p>withinamile: Okay. My Oberlin comment seems to be somewhat controversial. All I intended to do was list the colleges that I'm considering and my concerns about each. Perhaps I shouldn't have put my location comment so vehemently. Like I said, I do like Oberlin, but it's location isn't the best. But this is not even my primary concern. I'm more worried about their anthropology program. As for Beloit, I don't know much about the specific location, but trust me, the Wisconsin thing alone is giving me serious claustrophobia.</p>
<p>Wow, an argument. On the thread I started. That's exciting.</p>
<p>Oh, and do you guys know if Middlebury and Lewis and Clark could potentially be good additions to the list? I hear Middlebury is pretty strong in social sciences, but I don't know much about it other than that (and that if I go there, I'll most likely die of hypothermia).</p>
<p>For Chicago, it's all about your desires and expectations of what you'll be doing once you're here. If you want a party school, or a school where the guys and gals work on building up their sinewy muscles and then their tans, yeah, this is not the place for you.</p>
<p>Most of the students who come here are students who want to work hard (note that working hard and working all the time are not the same thing, Chicago's intense but not intense enough that you won't have any free time).</p>
<p>The people I know here who are unhappy here are people who don't want to work hard. At all. Ever. They want to show up to class, show off their smartness, get their A, and spend the rest of the day watching TV. Or they are people whose sense of self is so intimately connected to their grade, and they can't deal with it when they don't get all A's. Or they are people who think life as it is is completely miserable and the only recourse to this miserable life is getting smashed. You can see that these people don't really have my sympathy, and I sort of breathe a sigh of relief when they entertain the thought of transferring. Usually, though, these students don't transfer, as they realize that the school isn't that bad and (perhaps?) some of them come to the realization that they probably wouldn't be happy anywhere.</p>
<p>I found myself wanting to work hard in college, and I wanted to be in a place where other students invested as much time and energy to schoolwork as I did. I think if I went to a school where students didn't invest as much time and energy into school as I do, my classroom experience would suffer. Either the prof would lecture the material all the way through (boooooring) and the lecture would be a negative incentive for me to do the work on my own ("Meh, I'm not going to try this reading, because the prof is just going to explain it tomorrow in class!") or students who hadn't done the reading would say garbage and unproductively piggyback off of students who did the reading. The latter happened all the time in my high school-- students who bragged about not doing the reading would come to class, listen for the kids who did do the reading, and then package it up into something that had more terminology. I needed a change.</p>
<p>(Funny: in the high school class I'm thinking of, the students who always did the readings are currently at schools like Vanderbilt, Wesleyan, Tufts, Oberlin, Pomona, and Barnard. The students who sometimes or never did the readings are at Dartmouth, Columbia, and Yale. Just goes to show that there's no definitive correlation between prestige of school as measured by CC and how much your classmates will be a part of a productive classroom environment. All I hope is that at most colleges OP is considering and at most elite colleges, most of the students do most of the readings in a way that makes class discussion enjoyable and worthwhile).</p>
<p>When it comes to "laid back," Chicago is "laid back" to me in the way that people don't put energy into excluding each other by dressing up, by attending exclusive parties, by displaying wealth, etc. I also get the general "laid back" feel because, at least for me, schoolwork itself is very enjoyable, so class is a pleasure and not a chore, and when I see other students get very impassioned in class, I imagine they feel similarly.</p>
<p>Anyway enough propaganda for now :-)</p>
<p>Women's colleges started to provide an education for women when no or little coed education was available.</p>
<p>These days when boys get admissions boosts, they are still places that accept and support women.</p>
<p>My D's classes have been 60% at Barnard and 40% at Columbia, so she really is getting a coed education.</p>
<p>If it doesn't appeal to you, sure, fine. Not a booster. I'm just giving you the info. I know the CW major is awesome and the anthro dept. sends all undergraduates into the field.</p>
<p>I'm sure you will find the right fit for you.</p>
<p>unalove: Wow... You make it sound so good... And yeah, that's pretty much what I meant by "laid back."</p>
<p>mythmom: Thanks. I understand the historical importance of all women's colleges, but I'm just not sure if an all women's college would be right for me. Guys are different. They provide a different perspective. I'd feel weird attending a class without that balance of perspective. That said, if I were to attend a women's college, it would be a college like Smith or Barnard where coed classes are available.</p>
<p>I don't think columbia is right for you personally- too intense. Vassar, on the other hand, seems like a great fit.</p>
<p>Barnard is a lot more supportive than Columbia. And coed classes are not just available. You wouldn't be able to avoid them. Columbia gents take classes at Barnard.</p>
<p>But please, find the best fit for you. Doesn't sound like Barnard would be it. Just trying to put out accurate info.</p>
<p>Hamilton has a wonderful CW department.</p>
<p>slipper1234: Yeah, I've heard that about Columbia. I don't mind WORKING hard... I expect it. But I get the feeling Columbia students might stress over and be a bit too competetive about grades for me...</p>
<p>mythmom: Thanks, I'll check Hamilton out.</p>
<p>I just don't think Columbia will offer the comfortable LACy type feeling you want. Also its not "laid back" at all.</p>
<p>Look into Whitman College. It's laid back, great academics, wonderful place!</p>
<p>slipper1234: Alright. No Columbia, then... I am primarily interested in LACs (and LAC-ish places).</p>
<p>integrity09: Thanks for the suggestion, although I'm not sure Whitman is for me. Apparently they've got a lot of frat/sorority stuff there, and I'm not really into that.</p>
<p>StercusAccidit: FYI- 1) Beloit's Anthropology Department sends a majority of their majors on to top PhD programs. 2) The Logan Museum of Anthropology is an amazing resource on campus. 3) There's an Anthropology theme house. 4) If you're interested in South America, they run a 6 week field school every summer in Chile.</p>