<p>The short answer is that nobody knows for sure. The college does not ask a religious affiliation question on any of its materials.</p>
<p>The most reliable estimate I've seen published came from Dean Gross in a 2001 campus newspaper article. Of anyone on campus, I suspect he's in as good a position to make an informed estimate. Not only was he a Swarthmore undergrad (Class of '62), but he's been in the dean's office there for 16 years and probably has his finger on the pulse of the students better than anyone at the school. He's also Jewish.</p>
<p>At the time, he estimated 250 Jewish students. That would have been about 18%. If that number is accurate, it's not notable one way or another. </p>
<p>Hillel currently estimates (again, hard to judge the accuracy) 10% for Williams, 12% for Princeton, 15% for Amherst, 15% for Pomona, 23% for Yale, 25% for Columbia, 30% for Harvard, 31% for UPenn, 33% for Emory.</p>
<p>I would be very surprised if today were the high-water mark for Jewish enrollment at Swarthmore, based on the impact of rapidly increasing black, Latino, and Asian-American enrollment over the last several decades. </p>
<p>Specifically, the political climate at Swarthmore in the 1950's and 60's suggests a school that probably had above average appeal for Jewish students of the time. For example, Swarthmore withdrew from the Federal student aid program in the 1950s rather than force its students to sign loyalty oaths that McCarthy had instituted as a condition of federal aid. I don't think it's a misreading of American politics to suggest that anti-McCarthyism was a hot-button issue in the Jewish community. No matter the percentages, to suggest that Swarthmore suddenly changed its culture and became attractive to Jewish students in the 1980s is simply false.</p>
<p>Oh excuse me, is it just me, or has cc recently turned in to one continuous "infomercial" for a certain LAC? It seems that the never ending story about this particular LAC can be spun into evey single thread.<br>
This particular LAC does have its own thread. Maybe the moderators should consider keeping the continuous infomercial material contained in that thread. </p>
<p>With all due respect Sokkermom, this thread had zero discussion of any particular school until you and Kelleymegreener took back-to-back pot-shots from out of nowhere in posts #76 and #77 followed shortly by Speedo's "too many New York Jews" nonsense.</p>
<p>I did post links to both Swarthmore's and Yale's historical admissions rate data going back to the 1970s in one post because the topic was whether admissions at elite colleges has really changed. I'm sure that if you would like to post links to similar history data for other elite colleges, it would be viewed as a positive contribution to the discussion of evolving admissions selectivity.</p>
<p>With respect, Interesteddad, I think you're a little sensitive about Swarthmore. You consider any even slightly negative things said about Swarthmore (even if they're true) as attacks on the school. You're even elitist about it (your subtle way of taking pot shots at other schools) to only Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Williams, Amherst, and Pomona, as if these are the only peers the school has, when in fact the school serves as somewhat of a safety for most of these places. My post, #76, was not out of nowhere. You posted the school's historical admissions data, and I commented on what you put out there.</p>
<p>You take negative aspects of the school (which everyone expects from any school) and spin them into positives. You even stretch the truth. Take a look at the thread about fraternities on the Swarthmore board where you spun a positive and untruthful answer about a serious situation at the school that I asked about.</p>
<p>Okay, you love the school. Great. But your devotion to the place clouds your ability to talk fairly about the school. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>Schools that were avg. that are now Competitive </p>
<p>Which schools when you think of them 5-10 years ago were good schools, but not great and were adequately competitive are now getting really tough to get into - or have seen a marked increase in talented students apply.</p>
<hr>
<p>I think the above topic is far more interesting than what this discussion thread has turned into!! Btw...since when did Swarthmore or any similar schools recently become really competitive...they have always been super competitive! This discussion thread should be about emerging or recently emerged competitive colleges...I think that was indeed the original intent of this discussion!!</p>
<p>Post #76 was not a pot shot at anyone. An example was presented to illustrate a point. The post relates to the original topic. The point is that some of the less competitive schools have become more competitive because they are being used as safety schools to the extremely competitive schools. Because the extremely competitive schools are rejecting many applicants, some schools that have been historically considered to be safety schools (such as some of the LAC's and others) are becoming more competitive by default.</p>
<p>I think that when you use loaded words like "safety school" in relation to colleges like Swarthmore or Amherst or Wesleyan, you have to expect some flak. Btw, Intereresteddad may have his biases, but, he's never been less than civil in his replies and if people don't like the way a thread is going they can always start a new one; the topic is vague enough to invite all sorts of discussions.:)</p>
<p>Once again (since my previous post went ignored), I direct your attention to the difference between 'competitive' and 'selective'.</p>
<p>It appears that since this discussion is based on a 'consumer driven' perspective, wherein the applicants are really buying a product - college, then the colleges are being 'competititive' to attract the 'buyers' (students), who are, in turn, being 'selective' regarding which colleges they will 'buy' (apply to). In that sense, yes, the colleges are "competitive" but only amongst themselves. Once they have a "buyer" at that point the tables are turned and the colleges become 'selective' and the applicants 'compete' with each other to gain admission. A very neat little arrangement. </p>
<p>"Does anyone recall the original intent of this discussion thread"</p>
<p>Sorry if I contributed to the diversion (and am doing it again), but post # 84 piqued my curiosity because my mental image of Swarthmore was that it was to a degree somewhat WASPy- probably my association with its Quaker roots. If interesteddad's figures are correct, then it's Jewish representation is indeed unexceptional, in either direction.</p>
<p>To the others: FWIW, I have in the past posted some Swarthmore impressions from d's college hunt which could be (and were) taken as a negative from the perspective of some applicants. Interesteddad essentially voiced his agreement.</p>
<p>As for being a safety, I only know when my own child was considering Swarthmore, it would have had to be first choice, early decision. Acceptance in the regular pool was deemed to be extremely remote. I certainly don't think of it as a safety to Williams, Amherst, or Pomona, or anyplace really. But that's just my impression.</p>
<p>"Safety" was probably not the best choice of words. When I said "safety", I meant that it was not a first choice alternate for many kids, not that it was a guarantee that they would be accepted. In this sense, leanid is right. Semantics may sometimes blur an objective consideration of another's opinion.</p>
<p>Back to the original intent of this thread:</p>
<p>Definitely: NYU, Colgate, Conn College, BU, GW, Boston College, Colby, and Middlebury and to a lesser degree (at least in the Mid-Atlantic) Virginia Tech, Elon, U. of Delaware, U of Maryland, Towson, University of Charleston, and Davidson</p>
<p>I suspect reasons for this increased selectivity is based on (as others have noted) location (big city, bright lights), aggressive marketing campaigns, and simply the demonstration factor/teenage grape vine</p>
<p>The public Honors Programs, often as selective as the top Ivies and with student numbers often better, are increasingly becoming very competitive. For example, the entire SAT range for Univ. of Wash Honors was a low of 1300 and a high of 1600, with about a 1400 average; Avg unweighted GPA was 3.93.</p>
<p>Two schools that stand out in this area: NYU and San Diego State. </p>
<p>NYU used to get 15,000 applicants and admit 63%, now they get 38,000 and admit 29%. I notice on their website they claim this is the largest number of applications ever received by a private university. </p>
<p>San Diego State used to get 24,000 applications--this year they got 50,000+, which I believe is 2nd in the country to only UCLA. </p>
<p>(Note: UCLA has led the nation in freshman applications for the past 7 years, I believe).</p>
<p>I'm really shocked at the number of in-state kids that are not getting into the flagship Penn State University Park campus compared to even a few years ago.</p>
<p>Colgate, Colby and Middlebury have been competitive for a very long time, nothing new for these 3 schools. They've been destination schools for New England preps for many years.</p>
<p>Agree with a lot of the others esp UMD, Penn State and NYU.</p>