Smith vs Mount Holyoke

<p>Among the women’s colleges (we looked at co-ed colleges too), my D visited Smith, Mt Holyoke, Wellesley and Bryn Mawr. Bryn Mawr ended up being the right fit and she will be a Junior this Fall. </p>

<p>As for Bryn Mawr, the campus is beautiful, it’s an easy walk to the train that takes you into Philly in less than 20 minutes, an easy walk to a main drag that has shops and restaurants and the Bi-Co with Haverford works effortlessly with many students taking classes at both colleges (they are 1 mile apart and a bus shuttles students back and forth). Add to that the opportunity to take classes at Swarthmore and U Penn. D wanted a small campus setting close to an urban environment and Bryn Mawr certainly fits the bill. </p>

<p>Her classes to date have been challenging and rigorous and she has developed good relationships with her professors. I am amazed at the vast array of student clubs and organizations given the size of the school.</p>

<p>This summer she received a grant from Bryn Mawr for an internship in Philly and she is living on her own in an apartment near the U Penn Campus, working in Center City. This Fall she will do a Praxis course with a Philly city agency (for course credit), take one class at U Penn and two classes at Bryn Mawr.</p>

<p>I think that all of the five sisters schools offer excellent academic opportunities. They each have their own unique personality and a visit can help you to find the best match.</p>

<p>Welcome Bryn Mawr!!! I’ve been missing you.</p>

<p>I live near Bryn Mawr and agree that it is a lovely location - nice suburb with great access to Philly. My D did not consider it because it is so close to us - she ended up at Smith.</p>

<p>We’re the closest to Barnard – roughly 2 hours by car, but that’s where D wanted to be. And now she never wants to leave NYC again. (I was born there so it’s a return for the family.) However, she is going to London, where she’s also lived, for a Masters.</p>

<p>I loved every one of these schools.</p>

<p>I went to Smith and absolutely adored it–I didn’t apply to any other women’s colleges because I made a hard-and-fast (and in retrospect somewhat arbitrary and silly!) decision that my college class had to be bigger than my high school class of roughly 550, and Smith has the biggest enrollment of any women’s college.</p>

<p>I did take two classes at Mt. Holyoke and agree that their campus is quieter, more removed from the broader community (you’d really need to drive or take the bus to do much shopping, go to a movie, or do an internship), and more architecturally cohesive (I think their campus center and library are much prettier than Smith’s!). There are more international students at Mt. Holyoke, but more class diversity at Smith. </p>

<p>The two classes I took there were less intellectually challenging, and I did better in them, than my Smith classes (and I did worse in my Amherst classes and found them more difficult). My minor adviser at Smith encouraged me to take a math seminar at Mt. Holyoke and when I expressed apprehension, he said that seminar was really only on a high 200-level compared to Smith classes…that’s not to say there aren’t challenging classes at each school, though, and I came from a very good public high school so was prepared for high-level work.</p>

<p>Since graduation, I’ve met several graduates of Mt. Holyoke, Wellesley, and Bryn Mawr, and I would say the vast majority of us would’ve been happy and found our niche at any of the remaining five sisters…though of course we all feel a special affection for our own schools! I also met a few people who went to Agnes Scott and Sweet Briar, which are great schools in their own right and nice for folks who aren’t a fan of snow. I liked all of the women I met (with the exception of one mean and crazy Mt. Holyoke grad, but I won’t hold it against the school…goodness knows not everyone who went to Smith is awesome) and would note that there’s a special bond among women’s college grads regardless of which school you attended.</p>

<p>Now that we’re back on topic…just to clarify one statement in post #85…you don’t need a car to go to a movie from the Mount Holyoke campus. Aside from movies shown on campus, there is a movie theater in the retail complex across the street from the campus that shows current movies.</p>

<p>South Hadley is clearly not New York City. For a student who longs for the hustle and bustle of the city environment of Barnard, Parsons, NYC, BU etc – South Hadley is not likely the right place to go to school. But neither is Northampton or Amherst. While those communities have more retail and restaurant options than South Hadley, they are not cities. None of the cities are centers of commerce or government. For those types of opportunities, other than of research with a professor or a school institute (available at both Smith and Mount Holyoke) a student would need to travel from either Northampton or South Hadley.</p>

<p>The comments about courses at Mount Holyoke being less intellectually challenging indicate that Mount Holyoke may have an inferior faculty, or less intellectually minded students. The accomplishments of Mount Holyoke alums and grad school admissions stats…past and recent…and the faculty (available in assorted searches on the Mount Holyoke website and Google searchs) should help show that the education a student would get at Mount Holyoke is on par with Smith and the other top rated women’s colleges. It’s unfortunate that Stacy had such a negative experience with her classes at Mount Holyoke.</p>

<p>People often find confirming evidence for their point of view.</p>

<p>oh, I don’t want to make it sound like I had a “negative” experience at Mt. Holyoke. The campus was nice, the students I met were nice, the professors were well-qualified and kind and engaged. But I did find the courses easier and did get better grades in them, and I think that’s a useful data point for someone who is asking for anecdotal comparisons between the schools. Others who’ve taken classes at both schools may have a different opinion, and I hope the original poster seeks out more people with first-hand experience of both campuses.</p>

<p>I agree that neither South Hadley nor Northampton are going to be impressive to a prospective student who is hoping to be in a big (or even medium-sized) city. But Northampton is a bigger place and there are more stores, places of worship, restaurants, and movie/concert venues within walking distance of Smith than Mt. Holyoke…which are good both for getting an off-campus job and for entertainment. In terms of internships, I really can’t speak to what’s available within walking distance of Mt. Holyoke, but I know of many Smith students who interned at Northampton law firms, city offices (Northampton has an elected mayor and city council along with a zoning commission and the like; South Hadley has an all-volunteer Select Board and a traditional New England town meeting-style government), nonprofits, medical offices, public schools, a book-bindery, art galleries, accountants’ offices, etc. So there is definitely more than just working for a professor or at the campus school. </p>

<p>Of course, I maintain that the schools are much more similar than they are different and a student who’s happy at one would very probably enjoy the other. If it’s not possible to visit, I’d suggest applying to both and, if you happen to get in to both, comparing financial aid offers…as much as I loved Smith, I wouldn’t pay full price to go there if Mt. Holyoke offered a huge scholarship.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>For some reason this is the only piece of information I’ve managed to retain about Smith.</p>

<p>Verna, given the huge amount of info in this thread, one would have to wonder why “this is the only piece of information (you’ve) managed to retain about Smith.”</p>

<p>I don’t think Smith’s lesbian population is significantly greater. I think Smith has a very political atmosphere and the Queer population is very out. I say right on! sisters. </p>

<p>There are lesbian women at all colleges, and certainly at all women’s colleges, but there are a majority of straight women. I think the acceptance of women of various sexual persuasions is a strength of Smith (and the other women’s colleges.)</p>

<p>In 2006, 2boyisma posted some enlightening facts.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Am I to misunderstand you expect this thread should contain only enlightening, on topic posts? Good bloody luck with that. Especially with this overeducated, renegade bunch.</p>

<p>You’d have better luck controlling the raucous crowds at a Yale, Harvard football game.</p>

<p>As the OP is interested in Art, the science info. may not be as relevant to her…but , for others reading this thread, definitely reinforces the intellectual abilities of MHC students, faculty and alums.</p>

<p>And, I wouldn’t even think of “controlling” the CC crowd. I need the non-sequitur entertainment from time to time!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That was the intended purpose. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t mean to infer you were vying to be the </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with you Mythmom. My youngest D attends Bryn Mawr and I think one of its strengths is that the majority of students have a “live and let live” attitude when it comes to sexual orientation. I went to a program during parents visiting weekend (a few years ago) and heard several students (straight and gay) answer questions from parents about dealing with differences in sexual orientation. The students who responded made me realize that many young people today have grown up not making judgments about sexual preference. Their attitude is a healthy one, IMO.</p>

<p>The most remarkable part about (the many) discussions about the (former) Seven Sisters schools is how much the parents adore the school. I find it very remarkable because parents must weigh silly factors as the cost of education in the equation, and also weigh their return on investment against their daughter’s happiness and personal growth. In my eyes, this element dwarfs all the others. </p>

<p>On a personal note, and on a purely statistical basis, I wish parents (and sometimes) students would abandon the comparison of admission data as well as the “Barnard is Columbia” rhetoric. For instance, I am wondering if the parents who write that Barnard turned down Columbia’s offer of a full merger understand that it would have meant the end of Barnard as it is known, and that all the wondeful female students who are accepted at Barnard would face incredibly more difficult odds for admissions? All that is needed is to take a look at Harvard post Radcliffe to understand the changes. In the meantime, Barnard should be prouder of being Barnard, and consider its affiliation with Columbia as a bonus but not the defining element many love to push</p>

<p>And how come much of Wellesley’s sales pitch is how one can access MIT?
Or at Smith and Mt. Holyoke, the 5 colleges? And at Bryn Mawr, Haverford, etc.
In presenting oneself, this seems like leading from weakness.
So why not go to MIT, Amherst or Penn?</p>

<p>But I don’t experience Barnard doing that. Barnard is proud to be Barnard. And FWIW my D’s choice was between Barnard and Brown. She chose Barnard. She did not like Columbia’s core, and she likes NY much more than Providence. </p>

<p>Do we need to beat the dead horse of this issue? We were onto other things. There are plenty of other bash Barnard threads.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>In my experience, it isn’t. In fact D1 said that the reason why Wellesley was the only one of the 5 sisters she applied to is because they were the only one that spent their roadshow time telling what they had to offer and why you should attend Wellesley. Bryn Mawr, Mt. Holyoke, and Smith went on and on about why you should attend a women’s college. As I posted earlier, Barnard spent its time positioning itself as Columbia Lite. Maybe it was just the personalities or speaking abilities of the adcoms we were listening to, but only the Welleslely rep got up and told the girls and parents about what was great about Wellesley - not because it was a women’s college per se, and not because it provided access to another school, but because of what it offered in and of itself. They just seemed to have a little more institutional self-confidence.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t get the impression that the pitch from Bryn Mawr was that one could attend Haverford. What I heard was that the bi-co is a way for two small LACs to combine resources in a way that benefits students at both colleges and that the colleges make it easy to do so (e.g., regular buses between the schools, ease of registration). Some departments are at one college and not the other. Geology, for example, is at Bryn Mawr; in fact, even kids from Swat who want to take geology take courses at Bryn Mawr. Music is at Haverford and theater at Bryn Mawr. I’m sure there are other examples.</p>

<p>I heard quite a bit about the academic offerings (especially in pre-med, classics, French, and a major called cities–which seems to be urban planning and more), the campus ECs, the easy commute to Philadelphia and all it has to offer as well as the honor system at Bryn Mawr. Those topics were the main selling points, IMO, that the Bryn Mawr tour guides and ad coms and deans (at accepted student’s weekend) mentioned most often.</p>