<p>In browsing on the Pomona website, I noticed that it referred to itself as the most "prestigious" of the Claremont Colleges. I was wondering how Pomona students see themselves compared to the students at the other four colleges, especially Harvey Mudd.</p>
<p>Pomona students have the reputation within the Claremont Colleges for being elitist, because we seem to keep to ourselves and also think we are the most "prestigious". Most respond to this by saying, "well, we are..." - in terms of selectivity and rankings at least. (Btw, we also created the other Claremont Colleges, which I guess gives us the right to feel superior?). But besides that, I personally thing Harvey Mudd kids are ridiculously smart, and most of the "hostility" really goes to CMC since we are the biggest rivals with them. I have to admit, they also have a group of smart kids over there, but I (of course being biased) think Pomona is better.</p>
<p>Thanks. That's the kind of general information I was seeking. Can you (or anyone else) give me an indication of the relative political views and levels of activism of the different schools? Again, I'm most interested in learning about how Pomona compares to Harvey Mudd.</p>
<p>Harvey Mudd .ehhh...it was my top choice....until i got into pomona heh... harvey mudd people tend to have a rep for being smart...but like im doing comp sci and psych at pomona. the c.s majors tell me in the classes they took at hmc...the kids were just average smart and the pomona kids did better in the harvey mudd c.s courses</p>
<p>nceph:</p>
<p>Keep in mind that all five of the Claremont Colleges occupy a campus the size of Williams -- less than one square mile -- and share many of the same resources, including libraries. I don't think that you will find a great deal of difference in political views or activism. Certainly no more variation than you would find from one side of Emory's campus to the other.</p>
<p>I would say that the similarities would far outstrip any differences -- except for Harvey Mudd as any pure tech school will draw a very targetted student body.</p>
<p>All of the colleges draw heavily from California (Pomona 34%, Harvey Mudd 43%, Claremont McKenna 46%) and the majority from the Western States, as you would expect.</p>
<p>actually interesteddad, although the 5 colleges are pretty similar in most senses, I'd say that there are major differences between the schools in terms of political leaning. CMC is one of the more conservative schools in the country while Pomona, Scripps and Pitzer are pretty liberal. That's not to say that all CMC students are conservative and all Pomona, Scripps and Pitzer students are liberal but I've heard that the ratio is about 60-40 conservative to liberal at CMC and I believe that most Pomona students think of themselves as liberals. As far as Harvey Mudd, I think most students there are relatively apolitical but I would guess that they lean towards the left.</p>
<p>Charlez: so you found this site too? Just don't use any of your psych tricks.</p>
<p>Hi Tom and Charles</p>
<p>Tom, you're right on the money, methinks, with a few additional comments from moi. If I had to order the schools from left to right, it would go Pitzer, Scripps, Pomona, Harvey Mudd, CMC. You're on the money when you say the engineers are pretty apathetic when it comes to politics, and Pitzer also has a pretty active leftist activist/protest scene.</p>
<p>that sounds about right</p>
<p>The point I was trying to make is that the students from all five colleges are located on the same campus. So the fact that the "lefty" students tend to be on the Pitzer corner of the campus and the "righty" students tend to be on the CMC corner is somewhat irrelevant. The overall community is no different politically than any midsize university (Stanford, for example) where you have students from all political spectrums.</p>
<p>The mistake, for us East Coasters, is visualizing the five colleges as having totally distinct campuses, physically isolated from each other in the way that, for example, Swarthmore and Haverford are separated by ten miles.</p>
<p>In a way, the best analogy might be a university that groups its various departments into different schools sharing one large campus. </p>
<p>I find the Claremont model rather intriguing. It's sort of a hybrid between a the small liberal arts college approach and the large university approach.</p>
<p>Everybody bows down to the Harvey Mudd students when it comes to math and the hard sciences. They really are an MIT/CalTech quality group up there and they work harder than all the other people combined. </p>
<p>Pomona's title of the most prestigious school of the 5C's is tenuous at best. A Mudd degree in any of the maths or hard sciences is infinately more valueable than a Pomona degree in the same field. CMC is generally seen as far superior in economics, international relations, and government/polisci. That doesn't leave a whole lot of room for Pomona's vaunted "superiority." </p>
<p>There is a pretty big rivalry between CMC and Pomona. As a CMC student, I proudly adorn myself in my "Puck Fomona" t-shirt every now and then. However, the rivalry rarely gets ugly. Lots of CMC'ers have friends at Pomona and vice-versa. I would even feel entirely comfortable wearing my "Puck Fomona" shirt while walking alone at night across Pomona's campus. </p>
<p>Brandon
CMC '08</p>
<p>In response to Brandon's post, CMC is not generally seen as "far superior" in politics, IR, or econ by most people who aren't on CMC's campus. Pomona has extremely strong programs in all three of these fields. There are many CMC students who take their politics and economics classes at Pomona. CMC's strongest programs are econ and poli sci, but those programs are not noticably better or worse than Pomona (having taken courses in both fields on both campuses).</p>
<p>As for the rivalry between Pomona and CMC, it's pretty one-sided outside of the PP-CMS SCIAC rivalry. Very few people at Pomona who do not play on a varsity sport consider themselves rivals with CMC. If you ask me, the whole "puck fomona" thing seems to be a symptom of a collective, but generally unfounded, inferiority complex felt by CMC toward Pomona. For Pomona, the CMC/Pomona rivalry is pretty non-existant outside of varsity sports.</p>
<p>I am so glad to have found this thread. I am very curious about interaction between the colleges.</p>
<p>I am a parent of a S who will probably be applying to Pomona, and has visited informally both the Pomona and Harvey Mudd portions of the campus. He thinks he wants to be a physics and/or math major, but he loves his humanities and writing. He has told me he is no longer considering HM.</p>
<p>I'm not positive, but I think he dropped HM from his list when he decided to scratch off MIT and Caltech, reasoning that he would only apply to liberal arts colleges/universities. (His brother is currently at Caltech)</p>
<p>This annoys me, frankly, because HM offers some merit aid while Pomona does not. I am also somewhat concerned that what Brendan asserted is true, that the degree from Pomona in physics would not be as highly regarded as one from HM. At a college fair last spring, I asked the Pomona admissions rep about this--why should my son pick Pomona over HM? The answer I got was not really satisfactory, something like "Well, we think Pomona has a special character that outweighs other considerations."</p>
<p>So my question to all of you is: Is there really a special "character" to Pomona, compared to the other three, leaving out Scripps of course? What is it? </p>
<p>Any and all comments would be greatly appreciated.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not positive, but I think he dropped HM from his list when he decided to scratch off MIT and Caltech, reasoning that he would only apply to liberal arts colleges/universities. (His brother is currently at Caltech)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your son is looking at this in exactly the right way, IMO. You have to view Harvey Mudd as a tech school, just like MIT and CalTech. </p>
<p>Pomona should be best viewed as one of the very best all-purpose liberal arts colleges, like a Swarthmore, Williams, or Amherst.</p>
<p>The choice between an all-purpose LAC and tech school is such a fundamental choice that I find it difficult to imagine being a really good "fit" for both types of schools.</p>
<p>IMO, the frequency with which strong math/science kids get to college and find out they really don't like or don't have the aptitude for it at the college level is pretty high. Therefore, my gut says to only lock into a tech school if you are absolutely, positively, beyond a shadow of a doubt sure. Otherwise, go the all-purpose route. The math and sciences at the top LACs are plenty good enough to get you into ANY grad school, but you don't have to make that decision until you've sampled the whole spectrum of fields.</p>
<p>On Pomona: it's the top-dog of the Clarements because it is the original school. The President of Pomona had the original idea to expand by founding additional colleges and woo'd the heiress to the Scripps newspaper fortune to buy the additional land and give the money to get the second one (Scripps) started. Pomona's endowment dwarfs the other Claremont schools. In fact, its per student endowment is in the top ten nationally, slightly larger than Swarthmore's, Williams', and Amherst's. The other Claremont colleges aren't close. This is why Pomona has the least to gain from sharing even more resources among the five colleges.</p>
<p>a guy at CMC when i visited told me a joke/analogy about the claremont colleges. he had good friends at pomona so i dont think there was tooooo much of a bias but he said:</p>
<p>the claremont colleges can be related to scooby doo.
claremont mckenna was like fred (the manly one who takes charge)- because cmc is all about building leadership/ really emphasizes that.
scripps = daphne... ditzy girls.
pitzer = shaggy... i guess he meant pretty hippy, goofy, etc.
harvey mudd was velma... kinda obvious link (nerdy).
and pomona was scooby. he said that scooby didnt actualyl do anything or solve any mysteries, but he took all the credit for it.</p>
<p>dont get me wrong.. i love pomona but i think the general attitude is that pomona is condescending to the other schools.</p>
<p>Gotta agree with much of the excellent posts above. Just to throw in my two cents as to the many factors and in no particular order:</p>
<p>Pomona IMO clearly has the rep as being the top dog. It was the first of the 5 schools and its history goes back to the 1880's. It has the largest endowment and is pretty much viewed as the "flagship" (to the pride of Pomona students and consternation of CMC students- IMO Scripps, H-M and Pitzer have no interest in this "competition")</p>
<p>Pomona is physically IMO the most beautiful/"classic" campus of the 5-Cs, with Scripps a very, very close second. (Pomona's original architect also designed Stanford and Occidental). While the 5 schools are immediately adjacant and form, in effect, one contiguous campus, you know you are at different schools as you stroll around. While Pomona has a very classic east coast (ivy -but with palms- feel) and Scripps an equally classic Spanish/Mediterranean motif, CMC and Pitzer sorta look like bad 60's apartment complexes and H-M kinda resembles the world's most boring lego kit.</p>
<p>Academically, IMO the schools clearly have different focus with Scripps and Pomona the more classic LAC approach, with Pitzer strong on the social science side, CMC strong on econ/poli sci. etc and Mudd on eng and related science.</p>
<p>Politically, (generalizing of course) Pitzer is clearly toward the left, with Pomona leaning strongly that way. CMC is well to the conservative side and also sorta of a "jock" feel to it. Not so sure where Scripps really falls and IMO Mudd seems a bit apolitical. I think there's also fairly different social scenes at the schools ("libations" of choice and all that)</p>
<p>IMO these political and other attitudes do effect the general atmosphere of the various schools; and, while there is MUCH that is shared and the campuses are directly adjacant/connected, they are still 5 separate and distinct schools. The upside is you can go to any one school and truly get 5 for the price of one, being able to take classes at all 5, eat in the dining halls of all 5 etc. or you can focus on the experience of your particular school alone if that is your choice. It is truly a unique experience any way you chose to go. Although, as mentioned above, there are other shared school arrangements (haverford, swat, bryn mawr for example) I don't think there is anything like the Claremont consortium and don't think you could possibly go wrong at any of the 5 schools (and if your a guy, getting into Scripps, more power to you - lol).</p>
<p>wyogal - sorry, i just figured out why i couldn't post, and promptly resovled the issue.</p>
<p>in response to wyogal's post...</p>
<p>A year ago I would have told you to do everything you could to change your son's mind about Mudd. A year ago I was in what is often referred to as the "honeymoon" stage, desperately in love with my college of choice. With experience comes a little bit of wisdom...</p>
<p>Mudd students, in general, tend to believe they are superior to the students at the other Claremont Colleges. We've worked hard to get where we are and we can see just how intelligent our classmates are -- there are no more "dumb jocks", etc., as there were in high school. To be honest, I have no idea if this holds true at the other schools. I haven't taken many classes off campus yet, so my interaction with the students from the other campuses is fairly limited, and the few interactions I've had haven't always been under the best circumstances. Drunken Scrippsies will seem more slutty than sober ones. Even the Mudders get ditzy and annoying when drunk. I try to keep an open mind, and while I have a general perception about each of the schools, I don't apply it to the individuals I meet and instead let them reveal their own personal qualities, and I think most other Mudders do this as well. Furthermore, who doesn't think their school is superior? Once you've selected somewhere to go, you convince yourself that it's the best so that you don't feel bad about all the places you rejected, or all the places that rejected you. It's a simple psychological trick we all play on ourselves to make ourselves feel just a little bit better.</p>
<p>As far as encouraging your son to reconsider Mudd, there are a few things to bear in mind. Mudd is officially a liberal arts college, though realistically, it's a tech school. And it's a very difficult tech school. Most colleges limit their students to 4 courses per semester/quarter. Mudd requires 5 the first semester (plus a lab), and 4 with an optional 5th (that most students take) the second semester. Sophomore year is generally considered to be the most difficult. I'm currently taking 14 units (a "light" load) which comes to ~23 class hours a week, 10 of which are spent in lab. And then there's homework. But few question Mudd's difficulty, so I'll move on to the humanities...</p>
<p>Though described as a "liberal arts" college, there aren't many humanities courses at Mudd, and the ones we do have are, in my opinion, not as interesting or intense as one would typically expect. It's as though the professors expect you to be dedicating your attention to your other classes, and while this can be a nice break from the intensity of the technical core and the major courses, I try to take humanities courses that actually interest me, and so I've found myself disappointed by the ones I've taken so far. Despite the lack of classes (and the lack of depth) there are very strict requirements about the humanities courses a Mudd student can take. We have to have at least 10 (not including the first year "Hum 1" and "Hum 2"), 5 of which must be taken at Mudd (or 4 if you go abroad), and 2 from each of 3 disciplines (roughly - music, dance, and language; literature, history, and philosophy; psychology, political science, and econ). In my experience, the effect of these restrictions is that it limits too severely the students' interests, and they tend to become disengaged with their hum classes (which reinforces the tendency of the hum profs to treat their classes as lower priority). As well, several of the other schools (notably Pomona and CMC) are rather picky about who can take their courses, and it can be difficult for Mudders to get into their preferred humanities courses. </p>
<p>Having said all that, the curriculum is currently under critical review, and there's a good chance that it will undergo a drastic change soon -- possibly as soon as next year, and likely in the next three years. I have no idea how the changes will affect those of us that are already here, however, and as it is not certain when these changes will occur, if your son has a strong interest in something non-technical, I would suggest he look elsewhere. I have a passion for psychology that I fear I may not be able to fulfill while at Mudd, and I would hate to have that happen to someone else. (As a side note, there are a few Mudders who end up in off-campus majors. They still have to take the technical core, but I believe the humanities requirements are different, since their humanities ARE their major. So someone coming into Mudd that realizes they don't actually like math/science/engineering can still major in a subject that interests them without transferring to a different school. It's rare, but it does happen.)</p>
<p>But if your son ends up going to Pomona, tell him to hang out at Mudd, cause Mudders are really awesome people :).</p>
<p>As much as people like to think of CMC as conservative, isn't it more accurate to say that it's fairly balanced between liberals and conservatives, making it appear conservative when compared to many of the big name colleges?</p>
<p>The 5Cs, in general, are very liberal campuses. Different people will tell you different things about how the spectrum might go, but those who have put Pitzer at its left and CMC at its right are generally considered to be correct. Pitzer and Scripps are typically considered the most activist campuses among the 5Cs, but students who keep themselves aware of political goings-on around all five campuses are not hindered, because students from other colleges are welcomed in such events. When we call CMC conservative, this is certainly a relative distinction. It's relative to the other 4 schools, to many college campuses in general, and to the LA area. A more appropriate thing to say might be that conservatism is better <em>accepted</em> on CMC. Claremont can be a difficult place for someone who wishes to voice his/her conservative opinions. You have to feel pretty strongly in your beliefs to wish to take on that role.</p>
<p>Most students here think their school is the best. Yes, Pomona is stuck most strongly with that reputation. They are NOT the only ones. Elaborating will only make it sound like I'm generalizing and finger-pointing, so it's enough to say that these feelings pervade the campuses, and we accept them because it's understood that each campus has something valuable and unique to offer. I've taken multiple classes on every college, and I've repeatedly had my expectations defied...I've struggled through a great Pitzer course, breezed through a pretty bad Pomona course, and vice versa. While we can provide stereotypes and generalizations, take it all with a grain of salt. Remember that there are 5,000 students here and over 2,500 courses annually. Things get mixed up :-P </p>
<p>I believe the reason that Pomona gets that reputation is because, of all 5 schools, <em>ALL</em> of which benefit from the consortium, it is really the only one that could still stand strongly on its own. It has the size, the endowment, and breadth of study, etc., while the other schools have significantly smaller campuses, more focused strengths, less legacy, so on and so forth. I have found, generalistically speaking, that people who attend Pomona attend Pomona, primarily, with the Consortium is a convenient addition to their experience. On the other hand, many people at the other 4Cs--though we LOVE our schools--chose to attend the Consortium, primarily, and within that, picked the best fit school. I'm a Scripps student and I LOVE it. I fell in love with Scripps before really understanding the Consortium. On the other hand, I would never have attended it without the other 4Cs. Pomona students also tend to have the least amount of interaction with students from the other colleges. They tend to have more "PO Student Only" courses, more closed events/activities, etc., not because they're stuck up or what have you, but simply because they can. They have the amount of students and funding that allow them this.</p>
<p>I've heard students discount the Consortium, saying that it's a drain on their school, or whatever else. Whoever says this, from any college, is being truly ignorant of their experience. However much you imagine that the 5Cs interact with and influence on another, it's MORE. </p>
<p>It's also important to note that these stereotypes exist (and are strong and present), but they--at least in my experience--do NOT taint individual interactions. Nobody is going to NOT be friends with you because you go to a specific school and therefore MUST be X-type of person. They're just loose characterizations and we use them more for "inside humor" than anything else. </p>
<p>Harvey Mudd is NOT the place to go if you are not VERY, very sure of the path you wish to pursue. Even majoring outside of Mudd is less than ideal because the general education requirements are math and science oriented (and to no small amount). I might argue that Mudd presents better opportunities and atmosphere for its students than another school might, simply because tech degrees are the SOLE focus, but it's not an environment you want to enter half-heartedly.</p>
<p>It's also worth noting that while we go "our department is best at this and that," etc., cross-registration is VERY popular. If I'm a CMC econ major, I can go on forever about how my school has the strongest department, but sooner or later, I'll very likely see a relevant Pomona course that catches my eye, and I'll take it...same in reverse. </p>
<p>I, myself, have NEVER experienced feelings of divide and competition such as are coming across to me in this thread. I would say that my college--Scripps--has some of the greatest amount of interaction with the other 4Cs (being right in the center), and I personally have made to get a lot of exposure to other campuses (through both courses and extra-curriculars), so I don't feel like I'm being ignorant in saying this.</p>
<p>At risk of doing a little finger-pointing, it makes sense to be honest: Pomona students tend to be more Pomona-centric than other students at their respective schools. In fairness, the faculty and adminstration REALLY feed this. Sometimes it's an aggravation, but an incredibly small one. Because how often does it even matter? If you go to Pomona, odds are you don't see it as much, or you agree and don't care. If you go elsewhere, then you can choose to keep yourself away from it, or you just look at it as ignorant or whatever. </p>
<p>As for specific Pomona/Mudd relations...there aren't necessarily that many. The two are at opposite ends of the Consortium campus. The two schools both tend to keep to themselves more than the other 3 (Pomona because it's more self-sufficient and half of the campus is pretty far from the other colleges, relatively speaking, Mudd because its atmosphere, student body, and core curriculum differ so strongly from the other colleges), and as a result of that fact plus their physical distance from one another, have pretty little interaction with one another (<em>relative</em> to the other schools, again).</p>