One-line descriptions of each LAC culture from enrolled student

Parents Forum
201

<p>Xmere - as IDad has said, that has more to do with course selection than the college - so OK, your daughter doesn't need to go to MIT or Caltech or even Ga Tech - I'm not sure they were on the radar screen anyway.
If she is a humanities/soc sci type, even economics, I think if they admit her, they think she will be fine. I honestly think that at LACs and Ivies, and Duke and U of Chicago, and company, the admissions folks are looking and thinking about that kind of stuff as they are making the decisions. </p>

<p>I would add one thing to what Idad said, concentrate on schools that have open curricula, or minimum distribution requirements, or no specialized math requirements. I really think the "Rocks for Jocks" type of courses do a tremendous disservice in college programs. If my child was very artistic or right-brained, I would still recommend that she take Logic and statistics and college algebra - they ought to be able to design a course that leaves kids able to read science articles in the general media and have enough knowledge and reasoning ability to think for themselves about the scientific assertions, and know a little about statistics, accounting and compound interest. I know some of this is taught in high school in some places, but truth is, the reason some of these kids aren't "math inclined" is that their logic centers don't entirely mature until they are about 18 anyway. Sorry, rant over.</p>

202

<p>Thanks, IDad and Cangel. What you say makes good sense, and allows me to trot my daughter into places like Williams for visits without feeling totallly misguided (well, any more so than the 90% of other future rejectees).</p>

<p>Cangel, I subscribe wholehearted to your comments. I questioned the Chicago rep closely on this point, and it was clear that that august institution had unbent a little with regard to math/science sections of the Core. What I now find really shocking is that statistics is not integrated fully into the high school math curriculum. It is not possible to make informed judgments about information in everyday life without the basics in statistics.</p>

<p>As for your remark that logic centers don't fully mature until 18...make that, uh, 25?</p>

203

<p>Sarah Lawrence?</p>

204

<p>alright, i'm going to post my extremely-in-need-of-cutting-down college list. i'd appreciate any one-liners/descriptions you have, just so i can idea of what i should cut.
amhert
williams
barnard
bu
brown
carnegie mellon
pomona
claremont mckenna
scripps
columbia
duke
gw
georgetown
harvard
MIT
NYU
northwestern
Penn
Princeton
Rice
Stanford
Swarthmore
Tufts
Vassar
Wash. U in St. Louis
Wellesley
Yale
Wesleyan
Dartmouth
Williams</p>

<p>just as a background, im a rising senior and my cc's told me that me stats are good enough that i have a shot at these schools. i'm very much into leadership and political activism, and even though i've never done it before, i'm really intrested in trying out theatre. so, schools that give you an avenue to try new things would be awesome!</p>

205

<p>Well, you've pretty much assembled a list of most of the "best" all around schools in the country. They're all academically excellent, needless to say. I'd start by really examining yourself. On a piece of paper, write out what you feel are your main characteristics; what defines you as a person. Extroverted, introverted, city girl, country girl, laid- back, intense, musical, artsy, self-assured/ not self- assured, outgoing, shy, popular in hs, loner/ never felt like you fit in, quirky, sarcastic, intellectual... you get my drift. What are you like? With this knowledge in hand, research the feels of individual schools. For example, I know that I'm kind of a loner and more introverted. Because of this, I crossed Williams off of my list: the kids I met there, while great people, impressed me as the type who were very popular and outgoing in hs, and I didn't get a sense that I'd fit in. Give some real thought as to what you want in a college. Intense feel or laid back feel? Urban, suburban, or rural? Intellectual feel or preprofessional feel? Small and intense or large and bustling? LAC or university? Artsy, athletic, or a bit of both? Use these questions to intially slim down your list to about 10-12. Then, organize them in terms of region and plan out how you're going to visit, if you can afford it. It can really make all the difference if you can do it. I'd also check out each school's livejournal community; you can get a real feel for the students, what's important to them, and whether they're your "type" just by reading. My next post will be about the individual schools from what I know (this is going to get ridiculously long, so I'll split it up for easy reading :))</p>

206

<p>OK... now for the individual schools :) Mind you, these are just my impressions from my research, so take them for what they're worth. Do your own research, visit, and gauge for yourself.</p>

<p>Wellesley: intense, intellectual, focused, ambitious, supportive, friendly, serious, studious, quiet (as in not much of a party scene), academic <em>side note: I love it:)</em>
Smith: <em>note: I know this one wasn't on your list, but it sounds like it might be a good fit; I love it:)</em> artsy, quirky, in-your-face politically, liberal, opinionated, intense, spunky, fun, out- there, very friendly, supportive, intellectually exciting (I know, this sounds melted mozzarella- cheesy, but as mini put it, "intellectual sparks fly"; visit and you'll see what I mean), passionate
Swarthmore: <em>love it too, haha</em> intense, intellectual, very quirky, political, liberal (though less radical than Smith), friendly, introverted, cozy, intellectually lively, passionate
Williams: Outgoing, very friendly, popular, highly intelligent students who do everything (think student body president/All-State violinist/captain of the soccer team/lead in the school play all rolled into one), quite white, athletic/ hearty
Northwestern: preprofessional, friendly, popular, outgoing, more "normal" students (not nearly as quirky as the other schools so far)
Yale: you can basically find any attitude/ feel you want on this gorgeous campus; I'd say the majority is extremely intelligent with a good sense of balance in life, work hard/play hard, intellectual feel
Columbia: intellectual, New Yorker-ness (hard to describe), street smart and book smart, bustling, for the fiercely independent student
Barnard: New Yorker-ness with a slight edge taken off because of its size, intellectual, energetic, thoughtful, city- loving, friendly, community
NYU: you're basically living on your own in the city, the dorm being your apartment; NO campus, city- loving, energetic, bustling, can find any attitude you want there, beautiful people (this is frivolous, I know; but seriously, all the NYU kiddies I know are gorgeous), funky, fashionable
Amherst: I've researched, visited, you name it, but I can never seem to get a good read on its personality
Scripps: studious yet laid back, supportive, community, friendly, gorgeous, intellectual, artsy</p>

<p>...whew! sorry guys, I know that was way too long... hope this helps:)</p>

207

<br>


<br>

<p>She's a girl, I'll cut her some slack ;).</p>

208

<p>Not to sound like a feminist wacko, but being a girl does not in any way impinge or restrict mathematical/ logical ability. A friend of mine is graduating as a junior and going on to UChicago for physics; she is one of many girls I know who are exceptionally talented at math. Sorry if I took it too seriously :)</p>

209

<p>Au contraire, LadyL, you misinterpret, the average girl has logic centers mature at 18, the average guy at 25. </p>

<p>Also, I think we are talking as much about risk taking behavior, and "where did I leave my...?" as we are mathematical ability in the classroom. Obviously your friend is mathematically talented, but lots of kids are still thinking more concretely than abstractly until the late teens.</p>

210

<p>I can only describe my son’s experience at Williams, but I think a lot of my points would apply to other academically challenging schools as well. </p>

<p>First, I firmly believe that if they accept you they want to keep you and will make sure that you get the support you need to stick. This is especially true at the LACs. Look at the retention and graduation rates, which reflect both satisfied kids and effective educational systems. (Not perfect, but very, very good.)</p>

<p>Williams has loose distribution requirements that insure that the math/science kids take humanities and that the humanities kids get some exposure to math/science. Everyone, no matter what his/her discipline, learns to write. For my son the distro requirement turned out to be a good thing. The science and social studies courses that he chose were not remedial. They were as demanding as all Williams courses, but they were general enough to be accessible and interesting to the lay person. I know that the prevailing wisdom is that left their own devices kids will choose a balanced course list (kind of like that study of toddlers that showed when given free reign over the buffet they eventually chose some broccoli instead of ice cream), but I like the formal structure of the distribution requirement because I think it encourages (or maybe forces) experimentation outside of the safety zone. </p>

<p>The question of whether academically rigorous means an endless grind depends, I think, on the student’s individual goals. If s/he strives to achieve all A’s or close to it either because of personal drive, anticipation of grad school admissions or parental pressure, then s/he’s going to have a tough row to hoe at a school like Williams. On the other hand if s/he’s satisfied with a solid B average with a spattering of A’s (and even a dreaded C or two) then s/he’ll do fine. </p>

<p>Williams kids take their non-academic activities very seriously. It would be highly unusual to find a kid who just studies. I’m sure there are students who manage to have it all – 4.0 average plus plus a whole range of activities; however, I think it is more the norm to find a balance of academic and non-academic achievement. Both the college and the peer group encourage this approach. Like the smorgasbord approach to course selection, kids often experiment with novel activities outside of their personal comfort zones. </p>

<p>Winter study is another risk-free opportunity to experiment in academic and artistic areas outside of the student’s main focus. The list of Winter Study courses is truly astonishing.</p>

211

<p>Cangel... sorry; jumping to conclusions, as usual :) True, the abstract thinking areas of the brain only fully develop in the mid- twenties.</p>

212

<p>theatre brat--what do you want to know about webster? it's an incredible artsy enviroment. home of the internationally known opera theatre of st louis and has an excellent reputation for the arts. small school in a suburb of st louis. safe enviroment. has many older tudor residences used for various depts. many new ones also.</p>

213

<p>I just had to drop in and say that techies totally rawk. That is so my EC. And, apparently, female techies (who are not costume/make-up) are somewhat rare. ^_~</p>

214

<p>
[quote]
The question of whether academically rigorous means an endless grind depends, I think, on the student’s individual goals. If s/he strives to achieve all A’s or close to it either because of personal drive, anticipation of grad school admissions or parental pressure, then s/he’s going to have a tough row to hoe at a school like Williams. On the other hand if s/he’s satisfied with a solid B average with a spattering of A’s (and even a dreaded C or two) then s/he’ll do fine.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yep. I asked my daughter what advice she gave her "specs" on the whole issue of academic rigor. She tells them there are two kinds of kids who shouldn't go to Swarthmore:</p>

<p>1) If the kid didn't enjoy getting the work done in high school, forget about it. I'm not talking a total grind, or loving every minute of homework, but the kid has to at least have been generally OK with the effort required to do the assignments.</p>

<p>2) If the kid (for all of the reasons you mentioned) is going to fall apart at the seams unless he or she gets a 4.0 GPA, forget about it. She said those are the kids that really suffer. I think you have to go into with the attitude that, if I work at it and end up with a B average, well that's fine. If things go better, great.</p>

215

<p>Cangel, I was once skewered in a conversation between two women: One said that men don't catch up to women in maturity until age 40, and the other said, "Right...and then they promptly go into their second childhood." I was bleeding for a week.</p>

216

<p>TheDad - one difference in men and women is that we can blame our childishness on hormones - which should mean that we become all-knowing and wise after menopause?! NOT!</p>

217

<p>Middlebury: See Dartmouth/Williams</p>

218

<p>I see you have Williams on twice... </p>

<p>great eye for quality:D</p>

219

<p>Which colleges would you all say have a majority of introverted - type students, versus which are more appealing to extroverts?</p>

<p>Williams has been described here on this thread as extroverted.
Swarthmore as introverted. True?
Chicago?<br>
Columbia?
Wesleyan?
Pomona?</p>

220

<p>can anyone please describe Union College?</p>