<p>You forced the argument to shift over to Scripps v. Seven Sisters. But we'll go back to Scripps v. Bowdoin since you can't seem to back up your claim that Scripps is of equal caliber to east coast women's colleges.</p>
<p>You keep using that argument of Bowdoin being perceived as better than Scripps. In California, it's more than likely that people perceive UCLA or UCB as better schools than Harvard or Yale. Same idea, same flaws. If you even knew a thing about peer assessment you'll know that it isn't that accurate; with that said, that single subjective number is the basis for how you think Bowdoin is viewed by the public, which is not true. And peer assessment has nothing to do with how colleges are viewed by grad schools - only how they are seen by other undergraduate schools.</p>
<p>I did a little sleuthing and looked up the 4-year graduation rates listed in both Scripps' and Bowdoin's Common Data Sets for the Class of 2002, as this data was not available for Scripps after that year. I'm sure that you know that each college submits a similar report with important statistics pertaining to the college. Scripps listed their 4-year graduation rate as 74%, with a 6-year rate of 86%. Bowdoin listed their 4-year rate as 83.4% with a 6-year rate of 89.6%. Now, because it is 4 years later, I will give Bowdoin the benefit of saying that the 4-year graduation rate for the Class of 2005 (the last available) was a mere 82.7% (6-year rate obviously not available yet). I know these are not your treasured US News numbers, however they come from the mouths of the colleges themselves. I know for a fact, from giving tours and working in the admissions office, that Scripps has a 4-year graduation rate of above 80% - you can choose to believe that or not, since I cannot provide exact data if it is not available to me in print. Here is the link for the Bowdoin data if you want to look for yourself, straight from the horse's mouth:
<a href="http://academic.bowdoin.edu/ir/data/retention.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://academic.bowdoin.edu/ir/data/retention.shtml</a></p>
<p>Likewise, I looked at the US News report that you have been citing and noticed that Scripps did NOT have the lowest graduation rate. In fact, Bard (69%), Reed (70%), and Sarah Lawrence (74%) had equal or lower graduation rates within the top 50 LACs.</p>
<p>With that said, graduation rate has almost nothing to do with being smart, though you claim otherwise. I'm assuming the USNews reports were based on the Class of 2004 (though I don't know for sure). It may mean nothing to you, but I know that many students that year took a leave of absence for a semester (some for two semesters) to work on various campaigns (presidential and gubernatorial were the most common, I believe). Thus, they would have been enrolled in the college for 5 years, even though they only were in attendance for 4 of those years. I know students in my class who have taken a year off for medical reasons, for financial reasons, and because they were given an opportunity they simply couldn't pass up. There are other factors as to why a student may not graduate four years after they enroll that have absolutely nothing to do with their level of intelligence.</p>
<p>Selectivity is a product of the number of applications a college gets. Top schools tend to get more applications. Coed schools get more applications than women's schools - only half the population can even apply to women's colleges and many women are simply not open to the idea of an all-women's college. Women's colleges tend to have lower yields than coed schools as well. Thus, the school has to accept more students to fill the spots from a smaller applicant pool, making the acceptance rate higher and the school "less selective." I have already discussed the nature of self-selectivity of women's colleges and the fact that many of the students are just as qualified or intelligent as their coed counterparts. I think the quality of education at Scripps is just as good as the quality of education at Bowdoin - I visited classes at the various schools I visited when I was looking at colleges (top LACs, if you care - Carleton, Macalester, and Grinnell) and found that the quality of discussions and lectures at those schools was the same as my classes at Scripps have been. Likewise, the classes I have taken at CMC have been just as good, but not better, than my Scripps classes, even though it is "more selective" and thus filled with smarter students (according to your theory). I have not visited Bowdoin, so I can't compare my classroom experiences at Scripps to those at Bowdoin, but since Carleton is actually ranked more highly than Bowdoin (it MUST be better than Bowdoin) I would think that Bowdoin's classes would be quite similar.</p>
<p>You have given me quite a few numbers to look at - many are higher than Scripps (retention, peer assessment, acceptance rate, graduation rate, SAT scores, am I missing any?). However, these numbers in no way represent the quality of the students (SATs might, but the difference is not so great to argue that the students are SO much better than those at Scripps), nor do they represent the quality of education one will receive at Bowdoin. Scripps and Bowdoin offer completely different experiences, in different environments, and have different strengths and weaknesses. However, both are academically strong liberal arts colleges with the hope of providing strong educations for their students so they can be successful after graduation in whatever they may do. One is not more academically superior than the other. Students will choose to attend them for different reasons, namely location and single sex vs. coed. If you want to argue that Bowdoin is a better school than Scripps because you are in Maine, surrounded by trees, with opportunites to go camping every weekend or take a road trip up to Canada, fine. However, just saying that Bowdoin is a "preferable choice" and that "the students [at Scripps] are not as smart as you can see by its low graduation rate" only showcases your ignorance once again. You only continue to show your obvious bias (and I won't lie, I am biased toward Scripps, but only because I think it offers an equal academic education and experience) and inability to understand logic and fact.</p>
<p>Edit: That's great that you posted Ph.D data, but not all graduate degrees conferred are Ph.Ds. Many students only get a Masters degree - students who get Ph.Ds are usually interested in academia - many college graduates have no desire to go into academia. However, I do appreciate the lists - they are interesting. I wonder if they are from a per capita study or simply number of students from each school - it would make a huge difference.</p>